> Why can't there just be a manufacturer that goes for the niche of standard ISO rather than ergonomic, or with too few keys, or with some emphasis on buckling spring style feel?
Those features are what the mass consumer market wants. Also, I'm sure Logitech and Microsoft have always offered a standard ISO keyboard.
> Ergonomic
People value the long-term health of their wrists.
> Too few keys
Usually to reduce desk space. In the case of the Planck, it's also to reduce finger travel.
> Emphasis on key feel
If I'm typing at my job all day, I want the thousands of keypresses I do to feel good.
> niche of standard ISO
Honestly, I think standard ISO/ANSI is awful -- the vast amount of design decisions are a relic of the typewriter age.
The rows are staggered because typewriter keyboards had physical vertical bars under the keys that would otherwise overlap. An ortholinear solution makes much more sense in the modern age.
The second most-used key, backspace, is positioned in the far right corner of the keyboard. One must move their entire right hand (or have a long pinky) to hit it. The spacebar, on the other hand, is wasted real estate because it completely occupies two of the strongest digits -- the thumbs. Thus, a better solution would be to split the spacebar with one half being backspace.
This isn't even going into the nightmare that is QWERTY. Regardless of keyboard, almost everyone is using an inefficient layout designed to place common keys away from each other.
Conclusion: just because it's standard doesn't mean it's the best choice. IMO, when it comes to keyboard layouts, the standard is the worst choice.