However, that doesn't make a hoot of difference when you have an end product to produce. The nature of the game here is completeness. One of the concerns I personally have with Linux is that the toolkit is not the product. It does not matter how elegant a toolkit is in terms of programmer taste if at the end of the day the product derived from the toolkit is shorn of customizability, internationalization, attribute configuration, or a standardized way of working. No such beasts exist.
Commercial concerns look for more in a system than just programming elegance.
There is no question that it would have been much better if Motif had a programming front end like Qt. But the primary question is what can be done with it. As a native toolkit for producing products, there's still nothing to touch Motif. There are a number of private programs available, but as far as companies go, this is a no-no because it fails to guarantee any kind of continuance, stability, or development. Compare this with the Open Group's license for maintaining Motif, guaranteed by contract.