It contains such diverse tools as:
REAPER and Ardour and ProTools - Multitrack recording tools, used for recording live performances, with some basic MIDI capabilities built up over the years.
Cubase and Logic - MIDI sequencers, with multitrack capabilities accreted over many years to the point where multitrack recording (in the same contexts as the above category) is not unheard of, though the UI focus is different.
Fruity Loops and Ableton Live - Loop composition tools (for lack of a better description). Both are designed around loops as the basic building block of sound. While they have limited recording and MIDI capabilities, one likely wouldn't use FL or Ableton to make a symphonic soundtrack for a film, and certainly wouldn't use either to record a full band of performing musicians.
Renoise and apparently Radium - Trackers for the current century. These evolved out of the old Soundtracker style music programs (including Protracker, MED, etc. on the Amiga and then onto FT and Impulse Tracker on early PCs). They've acquired most of the functionality one expects from sequencers and loop based music programs, but don't usually have any multi-track recording facilities.
All are called DAWs by their developers and users, and yet how one uses them is pretty different. I pretty regularly use Ardour and REAPER for multitrack recording. And, I occasionally use Fruity Loops and LMMS for tinkering with remixes. And, I occasionally use Renoise for making electronic music.
I'd like it if there were separate terms for each of these concepts, as it would give folks a good language for talking about what each of these types of tools do. It would also rule out a lot of the stupid confrontational crap that often comes up ("Your program sucks because I can't do X, Y and Z, and I only ever use this other program!" where X, Y, and Z are functions specific to one of the above types of DAW...like "I can't easily do loop-based remixes in ProTools. ProTools sucks!").
And, the tools that pros use for specific tasks can also be indicative. You won't be surprised to find ProTools in a high end recording studio, and you won't be surprised to find a film soundtrack composer using Logic or Cubase. Likewise, you won't be surprised to find an EDM producer using Ableton. There's less overlap in what pros use than in what the tools are capable of in the hands of someone really good with that specific tool.
Anyway, doesn't matter. My point is that there are several different categories of program called DAW. The way they display and receive data varies wildly, and the use cases for them is pretty diverse, and I think it's weird to call them all the same name.
Ableton is literally a sequencer (and much more) and probably belongs in your MIDI sequencer category.
See what I mean? It's a DAW, but not like these other DAWs. It's a real DAW, you know?
Point stands: "DAW" means too many things to mean anything.
And if you're going to eschew the term and use descriptions instead, then it's important to get the descriptions right and not arrange them just so your favorites are up top next to ProTools even though they don't belong there.
Better categories: Professional DAWs - these do everything well: ProTools, Logic, (maybe) Cubase. Consumer DAWs - these aim to do most things well: Reaper, Ardour, GarageBand. Sequencers - geared for hip-hop and electronic music: Ableton Live (yes, it's awesome and will probably become full-featured), Fruity Loops. Trackers....
My point is being fussy about the term DAW derailed GP's question, when they asked if it's a DAW they're asking if it's a general purpose or specialty platform which is frankly a good question.
You're agreeing with me.
I said not all of these things should be called "DAW", but they are all called DAW by many people. I'm saying that is confusing terminology and I wish we could settle on calling some of these things something else. I don't care which things get called "DAW" and which ones get called crows or other types of corvid.
But, the term "DAW" is overloaded, and one of the negative side effects of that overloading is that whenever the discussion comes up somebody has to argue that a bunch of these things that people call "DAW" are stupid and we should hate them because they aren't good for X, Y, and Z. As you have eloquently demonstrated.
Were you trying to demonstrate that fact?
Also, I not only had no intention of derailing OP's question, I answered it by explaining that Radium is in the "modern tracker" category.
Rereading your post I see you did put Radium under your 'modern tracker' category, I think I was so appalled at how you described the other products that I didn't pay attention to where you put it because at that point you had already demonstrated the depth of your knowledge.
I worked as a recording engineer for 7 years before becoming a programmer, and I've seen top engineers doing things that I thought was a horrible idea, but they would end up with amazing sounds.
Otherwise, I agree with the other stuff you're saying, just felt like nitpicking about that.