You really wanted to get your point across

PhilW
For the life of me, I cannot imagine why anyone would buy high-end hardware that locked them into Sonar. The inability to use something else just wouldn't fly. Yes, I know, Pro Tools, but they have had that for ages, the ship has sailed. 

With opinion like yours in the board room. Ideas are DOA.

Here we are: 
 
Complete PC Audio Recording System
A complete, preconfigured, Studio-in-a-Box, TASCAM Track Factory Project features an Intel NUC PC pre-loaded with Cakewalk SONAR Professional Recording Software, a TASCAM US-2x2 USB Audio Interface, TASCAM TH-02 headphones and a TASCAM TM-80 Condenser Microphone. 
Turn on, plug in and rock out.
http://www.tascam.com/product/trackfactory_project/
 
Get it here for $1299
https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/TrackFactory
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1312083-REG/tascam_track_factory_project.html
 
No reviews at either site. That says this is not a hot seller.  But it is available.  Plug and play for all! 

Pro Tools was always a hardware company.  They started out with a dsp accelerator card and interface - that was the first lower-cost, commercially available digital recording solution for home computers.  Even today many "pro tool" systems are DSP units for zero latency (plus a bunch of other stuff) years before anyone else came up w/ home studio digital.. 
 
Just because Avid does the software too (Avid started as video editing systems), one should know they did hardware, too, and went from interfaces/DSP to controllers.  And they can not because they are universal, but most hi-end recording studios use their products and spend the money on expensive hardware.
 
Anyone can always put up the money and invest in a hardware controller designed for only SONAR and how you want to work with it.  It would be expensive, tho, which is probably why no proprietary system (except for protools) is successful.

Audioicon
...Cakewalk/Sonar HD completely configured for Sonar.

Thoughts?

I think that would discourage sales.
 
I have the Cakewalk UA-101 and UA-25EX. They work with anything.
 
I am currently considering the Cakewalk V-Studio 20.
And if it only works with Cakewalk Guitar Tracks?
No sale.

dwardzala
I think the issue here is what would the benefit be, or the why buy?  Why buy this cakewalk branded hardware?  It may or may not be lower latency.  It may or may not be easier to set up. 

WOW! Maybe I am more optimistic because I work with technology for a living.

You sound like this:

"Why have UBER?" There are taxis and no one is going to ride UBER.
"Why have AIRB&B?" There are hotels and no one will need to stay in peoples house.
"Why have Twitter?" People will prefer to write letters.

See my friend, the idea and premise of technology is to do the unknown, is to break down barriers of impossibilities.

So do you have any thoughts on the possibilities?

Presonous does this for Studio and it is highly attractive and users love it. I am not only talking about Audio Interfaces, I am talking about Controls Surfaces.

My apologies if I sound brash, I am just trying to state, that you have to look at the possibilities of technology, not simply the possibilities of short-comings.

I'll leave you with this: Nothing we have today would exists if the people creating these transformations were more focus on the "Why it may not work."

Think about it.

PhilW
For the life of me, I cannot imagine why anyone would buy high-end hardware that locked them into Sonar. The inability to use something else just wouldn't fly. Yes, I know, Pro Tools, but they have had that for ages, the ship has sailed. 

Where in my post did I say LOCK? I said tight integration, I used pro-tools as an example but I did not say it had to be locked. Think Studio One and Presonous, you can use one without the other even though there is tight integration.

Again, it does not have to be locked to Sonar but tightly integrated.

Majority of the response are about "why it is not possible." To me this is detrimental to the standing of Cakewalk of an industry powerhouse. Making Software alone is not going to push Cakewalk over the edge. I think we can see that all around us.

Cakewalk is owned by  a company who also owns Tascam. I cannot imagine, Tascam releasing a Control 24 for Sonar and nobody wanting to buy it.

We are talking technology here.

Audioicon
Majority of the response are about "why it is not possible." To me this is detrimental to the standing of Cakewalk of an industry powerhouse. Making Software alone is not going to push Cakewalk over the edge. I think we can see that all around us.

Cakewalk is owned by  a company who also owns Tascam. I cannot imagine, Tascam releasing a Control 24 for Sonar and nobody wanting to buy it.

We are talking technology here.

Oh, that would be so nice - Tascam are you listening, Tascam we are talking to you!!!!

It really has nothing to do with the possibilities of technology.  Your ideas and dreams are great, except for one thing.
 
To have a business, you need customers to buy your stuff.  And they have to buy enough stuff to repay your investors for the development and design of said technology, as well as provide them with a nice profit.
 
Don't assume that the tech companies in the music industry are not already paying very close attention to marketing data and sales trends.   It's an industry with very tight profit margins, with a few companies on the brink of going out of business.
 
"If you build it, they will come" only works in the movies...