I'm not sure PARC had clear objectives or goals. Kay talks about 'visions not goals' as being a key aspect of research back then, an aspect that is missing today.
https://www.quora.com/What-made-Xerox-PARC-special-Who-else-today-is-like-them/answer/Alan-Kay-11
On the point of competitive advantage, I agree with
@Mariano Guerra - I don't think these languages as-is provide that much advantage in all applications. Mostly you get advantage out of whatever has good integration with the entrenched system (to
@robenkleene's point on frameworks). But I think it's important to distinguish between 'what fits the market today' vs 'research'. These ideas are just points on a research
trajectory. Thinking long term, perhaps exploring these ideas have more promise to qualitatively change computing?