The answer to that is more likely found in the realm of psychology than in the realm of technology.

It's people missing the point between functionally better and theoretically better.
Or wanting what's theoretically better anyhow, even if there is no useful benefit from it.
I tried to describe that with the "fuel left" comparison.
It's easy to show that a butted spoke will last longer under some conditions of load cycling. Making it theoretically better. And desirable to many.
But that longer life isn't a useful advantage unless your type of riding creates those kinds of load cycling or mileages where fatigue begins to occur.
I'm convinced that if someone were to make a fully waterproof - as in dive-certified, not rain proof - bike computer, some people would gladly buy it on the grounds of being better.