quantumeffect
I started with Cakewalk's Pro Audio 6.0 in about 1996.  At the time I didn’t know the first thing about it so; I walked into Sam Ash explained to the sales guy what I wanted to do and asked me if I was using a Macintosh or a PC.  I said PC and went home with Cakewalk.
 
Does the historical PC vs Mac angle have anything to do with Calkwalk’s popularity?  I don’t know the answer to that question but I throw it out for consideration.

I also started in a similar way with Cakewalk. Although none of us could afford Pro Tools +hardware, that seemed to be the desired product to be "Pro". Cakewalk was on the other hand, very affordable to the local musician and besides, you also got a free copy of Cool Edit Pro.

I started off with cakewalk by having an se version included with an interface. Prior to that I was using a combo of Vegas, Acid and Sound Forge. I upgraded and have not looked back.

I started with Cakewalk v1.0 then kept upgrading.  The thought of switching to another program when the one I was using was doing most of what I needed didn't occur to me (everything I couldn't do, I was able to accomplish using SoundForge).
 
Ok, so maybe there's no Logic or Reason to that, but so what?  I'm not a Pro Tool! 

craigb
I started with Cakewalk v1.0 then kept upgrading.  The thought of switching to another program when the one I was using was doing most of what I needed didn't occur to me (everything I couldn't do, I was able to accomplish using SoundForge).
 
Ok, so maybe there's no Logic or Reason to that, but so what?  I'm not a Pro Tool! 

I see what you did there!!  I find that DAW jumping is rarely a good idea.  The only DAW I used prior was Cubase and was not a fan.  Acid actually did most things I needed.  By version 6 I found my familiarity with workflow (inckuding workarounds) was sufficient to overcome any shortcomings.  Unfortunately, Sony kind of abandoned the project and Cakewalk offered a deal too good to pass up for a product that seemed better supported and with more capabilities. I have friends that jump from DAW to DAW and their music never actually improves.  In the past year I have had a few screaming how wonderful Studio One is but never give a reason that makes sense as to why it's better than the last three DAws that were so wonderful previously.  Because of work I have to use Logic regularly and occasionally FL Studio (mostly training purposes) but aside from that I have had no desire to go elsewhere.

I had a friend who used Cubase. That was my introduction to DAW software. When I was ready to set up my own studio, I researched my options and chose Sonar instead. I've never regretted it. (Did I mention that I really can't stand Cubase?)

quantumeffect
 
Does the historical PC vs Mac angle have anything to do with Calkwalk’s popularity?  I don’t know the answer to that question but I throw it out for consideration.

The people who got into digital audio back then did set standards by opting for this instead of that. Those decisions still influence common perception to this day, for better of for worst...
 
Back in the early days, Pro Tools only ran on Mac. Whether we like it or not, Pro Tools is what replaced tape in the vast majority of the big commercial studios.
 
If you used MIDI, the main options were Vision Studio Pro, Digital Performer, Cubase, Logic and Cakewalk.
 
Cubase and Logic were both cross-platform, and both had a long history dating back to Atari, so they were pretty much well established. The fact that they ran on Mac also meant that people running Pro Tools studios were probably more inclined to use Cubase or DP for MIDI than a PC only product.
 
Cakewalk being the only one not available on Mac, it was often regarded as a poor man's alternative. In fact, pre-Sonar, it was too commonly refried to as "a toy".
 
All the others mentioned in the OP - Cubase, Nuendo, Reaper, Live are cross platform, Logic is Mac only.
 
If you consider that Mac has had a strong presence in the audio community from the early days on, it's not that surprising that a PC-only product doesn't get mentioned, especially if there are alternatives. Not like GigaSampler or Fruity Loops which were somewhat unique.
 
Of course, that doesn't tell anything about Sonar's capabilities. It's strictly name recognition.
 
 
 

I actually have heard Cakewalk mentioned more in engineer circles than it has been in the past.At least in the circles I'm exposed to. I'm getting the feeling things are gaining momentum although slowly. Some large bungles at times by the others have caused some to look elsewhere and in looking and have  began using Sonar. 
 
I think the blue collar idea is correct and I agree with that. Cakewalk was the poor producers software at one time. I think that image is changing though.
 
I had noticed in buying some UK music recording Mags that Sonar still seems to be almost invisible. I'm happy to see we have a good mix of UK users over here on the forum. Just because a magazine chooses to omit Sonar  doesn't mean the people in the UK have lost touch with the rest of the world.
 
Did I see Cakewalk looking for coders with Apple experience? I think things might change significantly if Cakewalk writes code for Apple.If Apple starts to slide, and I think they are slowly loosing ground...then maybe coding Sonar for Apple won't be a lucrative proposition. 
 
I look at Sonar as an equivalent to Logic In Apple. While Microsoft doesn't own Cakewalk I see a closer marriage between  Sonar and Windows than in any other windows based DAW. Why do I say this? Who else has used win 8 to it's full potential with touch screen capability ? One of the first to adopt full usage of multiple cores at the kernel level...and on it goes.
 
When it comes to the other DAWS  I have a few of the others. I think they all try and look at what's best and sometimes they cross polinate. I seen Cakewalk adopt a few tricks from the others,  Studio One still doesn't have floating windows as far as I know, but they do have a nice layout. Who knows maybe the new version will have that. The floating screens in Sonar makes working with dual monitors a breeze. It looks like X4 might have consolidated the control bar along the top..that would make sense....so I think future designs will affect future popularity. The slowly growing user base will have a snowball effect I think. The more people using Sonar the more words gets around.
 
After working with a few people who have different DAWS I see the whole thing can become trivial. They can all make good recorded tracks. If you're working with a guy and he has Pro Tools, just export him the waves...or he can export waves to you...so why does it even matter so much? So I don't feel as if I need Pro Tools or any of the others. I work in what I like to work in and I like Sonar much of the time.
 
I think public perception about Sonar is gaining ground. I think the acquisition by Gibson was a great boost. I think the future holds good things for Cakewalk and it will come to the point where it will be impossible anywhere to ignore them. People will ask...hey why don't you guys include Sonar in your magazine?
 
 
 
 

Starise
It looks like X4 might have consolidated the control bar along the top..that would make sense....
 

I didn't know X4 had a leak. I found this though
http://i.imgur.com/oryPJky.jpg

Starise
I think public perception about Sonar is gaining ground. I think the acquisition by Gibson was a great boost. I think the future holds good things for Cakewalk and it will come to the point where it will be impossible anywhere to ignore them. People will ask...hey why don't you guys include Sonar in your magazine?
 

I don't hang in engineer circles, in person at least. I think it wont gain as much popularity until a major artist gets behind it and more hardware comes out for it. I tried looking around for some decent hardware to hook up to Sonar and once again Sonar never gets mentioned on a lot of the products I saw.

Yet........I might surmise if you do a "Jimmy Kimble- person on the street" interview about computer music, most people will mention 'Auto Tune' which is not even a DAW.
Diving a little deeper, Pro Tools and Cubase will stand out.
 
I think these are the brands that stand out as Xerox is to photocopying, Google to searching engines..............
Yet, people who know; knows Sonar!
 
 

SimpleManZ
Yet........I might surmise if you do a "Jimmy Kimble- person on the street" interview about computer music, most people will mention 'Auto Tune' which is not even a DAW.
Diving a little deeper, Pro Tools and Cubase will stand out.
 
I think these are the brands that stand out as Xerox is to photocopying, Google to searching engines..............
Yet, people who know; knows Sonar!

I think audio production is synonymous Pro Tools and not Cubase. I have to go look into stuff to hear about Cubase where as Pro Tools is pumped into every song lyric and pop culture.
I wasn't talking about street people though; but more of people going into audio production as professionals or music artists.