They should also be dropping free AMD GPUs off helicopters, as Nvidia did a decade or so ago, in order to build up an academic userbase. Academia is getting totally squeezed by industry when it comes to AI compute. We're mostly running on hardware that's 2 or 3 generations out of date. If AMD came with a well supported GPU that cost half what an A100 sells for, voila you'd have cohort after cohort of grad students training models on AMD and then taking that know-how into industry.
For example OTOY OctaneRender, one of the key renders in Hollywood.
They have improved since that article, by a decent amount from my understanding. But by now, it isn't enough to have "a backend". The historical efforts have spoiled that narrative so badly that it won't be enough to just have a pytorch-rocm pypi package; some of that flak is unfair though not completely unsubstantiated. But frankly they need to deliver better software, across all their offerings, for multiple successive generations before the bad optics around their software stack will start fading. Their competitors are already on their next gen architecture since that article was written.
You are correct that people don't really invoke CUDA APIs much, but that's partially because those APIs actually work and deliver good performance, so things can actually be built on top of them.
And as of 2025, there is a Python CUDA JIT DSL as well.
Also, even if not the very latest version, the fact that CUDA SDK works on any consumer laptop with NVidia hardware, anyone can slowly get into CUDA, even if their hardware isn't that great.
OTOH, by emphasizing datacenter hardware, they can cover a relatively small portfolio and maximize access to it via cloud providers.
As much as I'd love to see an entry-level MI350-A workstation, that's not something that will likely happen.