Readit NewsSo beautifully put!
It's basically an arms race. This is also the reason why graphics drivers for Windows are so frigging big (also AFAIK).
I think this is very accurate. The exception is probably those block buster games. Those probably get direct consultancy from NVIDIA during the development to make them NVIDIA-ready from day 1.
18 seconds before the next wave of people crushes you. 18 seconds to get out. 18 seconds could save your life.
Admittedly this theory is only backed by personal preference and some vague recollections of CRT-era ergonomics discussion in 1990s UI design books.
Same for my argument too.
There is also the cultural factor. The age when I was going to make a decision about which high school to choose and what kind of study to pursue, we had the chance to enjoy the release of a few of the best sci-fi movies/shows ever made. Those movies had the black screen, neon green/blue strokes and fonts as the main design language. Looking at the letters falling down in the movie Matrix, it was like "coooool, I wanna be able to type those in real time and make computer do stuff".
OP blames FOSS for not providing an IDE protocol a decade earlier, but doesn't ask the rather obvious question of why language-specific tooling is not only still around, but as market-viable as ever. I'd argue it's because what LSP tries to do is just stupid to begin with, or at least exceptionally hard to get right. All of the best language tooling I've used is ad-hoc and tailored to the specific strengths of a single language. LSP makes the same mistake Microsoft made with UWP: trying to cram the same peg into every hole.
Meanwhile, Microsoft still develops their proprietary Intellisense stuff because it actually works. They competed with themselves and won.
(Minor edit: I forgot that MS alone didn't standardize LSP.)
Could you elaborate why? It looks like a useful protocol.