I often wonder what it is that makes DAW users so parochial and protective of their chosen software.
I frequent a few Photography/Image Editing forums, and even those hosted by the software producers themselves don't seem to demonstrate the insularity often found in DAW forums and discussion boards.
If anything, I've found the opposite to be true, in as much as most customers of photography and image editing based software providers' seem more than happy to use a range of products from various companies. Providing the end product, be it a stunning photograph or a lucrative piece of graphic design, is the best it can be, then each piece of software that helped enable seems valued.
Mind you, I wonder if this is in some way influenced by Adobe's domination in the field of image manipulation. I've tried out a fair few Photoshop/Lightroom-type software products, I've even purchased a couple, but for me anyway, my Adobe products just do everything so well it would be hard to imagine being without them.
If anything, Adobe are quite shrewd in some respects. In a lot of cases, instead of designing a particular product to compete with another developer's program, they deliberately adapt Lightroom, and Photoshop particularly to act as either a host for their "rivals'" products (as plug-ins) or a port whereby images can be easily be exported and imported from other software (I suppose the corollary with audio software would be the use of VST plugins and Rewire?).
As I say, Adobe's pre-eminence in its field isn't necessarily built on the superiority of its applications, but more so on its willingness to adapt and integrate with other products. It certainly has little competition in this particular way of working though, so Photoshop versus
Corel versus
OnOne versus
Topaz type arguments are less likely to crop up.