To potentially disrupt, or not disrupt...
Potentially disruptive = initially bleeding edge = likely outage = very likely business losses = almost definite job losses
The mainstream vendors aren't late to the game, they've just started the second half a little slow, they've always been in the game.
Personally I think there is some value in Gartner reports, even if you need to take them with a pinch of salt, as they look from multiple perspectives I wouldn't necessarily think of.
However, as many have commented, look at your own requirements, the impact of known versus new (because TCO is just as much about management as anything else), whether that extra special feature that no one else has is really going to make a significant (and positive) difference, and so on.
One last thought from me, the only reason to have a separate AFA MQ and including any of the mainstream vendors who have constructed an AFA version that I can see is to say who's got the FASTEST device. The very old and frankly irrelevant "who's fastest?" debate.
Yawn. My speed requirement is "Fast enough to meet my business needs at the right TCO" I'll say that again, "Business Needs and TCO", same as it was pre-flash / SSD, same as it will be with the next big disruptive thing.