You're discounting the network effects. Also, eBPF provides many more capabilities beyond dTrace, and it will be ubiquitous across all OS, without having to make the exception for Linux. Anyone targeting full cross-platform capabilities will be better served by eBPF. The unfortunate history that crippled dTrace on Linux, will lead to its ultimate sidelining.
I don't really know what you mean by network effects, but perhaps we're just talking about two different things: you are looking at eBPF as a substrate to deliver arbitrary software (?!) whereas I view DTrace exclusively as a diagnostic tool. As to their relative capabilities: its other potential advantages aside, eBPF (and the tooling built upon it like bcc) lacks much of the functionality and polish of DTrace when attempting to accurately instrument the system. Its lack of robustness makes even basic instrumentation challenging,[0] let alone the richer (and admittedly, more esoteric) features of DTrace that it's missing entirely.
You can argue about the relative beauty and polish of the tech, but just as Git won against more polished alternatives, so too will eBPF displace others because of its platform reach.
eBPF combines amazing tech, with a platform reach that is impossible for dTrace to provide. It's this unique combination that will capture the mindshare necessary to relegate others to the sidelines.
