If you are referring to the broad consumer market, I won't argue that point.

BUT . . .

Some of us march to a different drummer, and do not follow the crowd just
because everyone else seems to be doing the same.

In the mid-60s, lots of uninformed people predicted that LF and MF were
dead.  Time has proven that was not the case.  Photographers are still
shooting in larger formats, often using lenses that are 80 or more years
old, and producing fantastic results.

Despite digital's numerous advantages it is not always the best choice,
every time.  There is no "one-size-fits-all" in photography.  What I most
dislike about digital is that there is a sameness about so many of the
images.  As one noted photographer was quoted last year in a NY Times
article, all the pros seem to be using the same two or three lenses.

Zeiss Ikon may not be a runaway best seller, but it WILL command a
following, and it will also serve to offer new venues to those that want to
work in film.  That hurts no one.  But the one point I want to stress is
that Zeiss NEVER claimed that their new camera line was going to take the
world of photography by storm, and it is inappropriate to dismiss them
simply because they don't achieve a commanding lead over digital.