I understand what the author is saying, but vendor lock-in with closed-source observability platforms is a significant challenge, especially for large organizations. When you instrument hundreds or thousands of applications with a specific tool, like the Datadog Agent, disentangling from that tool becomes nearly impossible without a massive investment of engineering time. In the Platform Engineering professional services space, we see this problem frequently. Enterprises are growing tired of big observability platform lock-in, especially when it comes to Datadog's opaque nature of your spend on their products, for example.
One of the promises of OTEL is that it allows organizations to replace vendor-specific agents with OTEL collectors, allowing the flexibility of the end observability platform. When used with an observability pipeline (such as EdgeDelta or Cribl), you can re-process collected telemetry data and send it to another platform, like Splunk, if needed. Consequently, switching from one observability platform to another becomes a bit less of a headache. Ironically, even Splunk recognizes this and has put substantial support behind the OTEL standard.
OTEL is far from perfect, and maybe some of these goals are a bit lofty, but I can say that many large organizations are adopting OTEL for these reasons.
True, however they are worth the price. I used various brands of LED bulbs for a long time (such as Cree), basically whatever Home Depot was selling. The failure rate was extremely high. In 2017 I switched to Philips LED bulbs, and just last night the first one failed. Overall they are worth the extra up front cost, they'll save you money in the long run.