Why are hi-end active monitors not more popular?


I was just curious why more home systems don't utilize active monitors from hi-end manufacturers. Dynaudio, Focal, PMC and Genelec to name a few seem to have very high value offerings that, on the surface, appear taylor made for a simple system. Just add a cd player with volume and balanced outs or a hi-end dac connected to a music server. Pros and cons are appreciated. A home consumer version seems to have already made it to market in the NHT XDs system. I haven't heard the NHT system and would appreciate your comments.
ghasley
I've always thought that'd be ideal, especially for music in multiple locations throughout a house... pair of active speakers + Squeezebox in each room, and that way the longest runs of cable are just ethernet.

But aren't most active monitors designed for very near-field? This would seem to limit their appropriateness for home listening.
Post removed 
Because it isn't about sound or value for money; it's a hobby, so people want to believe that they have arranged for a sublime combination. Audio is an ends/means reversal of epic order.
Active speakers are a one size fits all option but this hobby doesnt work like that. Also some sound like Pro speakers and many dont like that.
An active speakers is really just a speaker with an amp built in, when my VMPS speakers are hooked up to amps they are active too.

What about vibration between amp and speaker? It's a little hard to keep the vibration out of the amp when it's in the speaker cabinet. Then you have to run power cables to the speakers. maybe not as much an issues if you are already using mono blocks next to your speakers.

I think there intended use in inexpensive home studio's in the near-field where you will not be listening to them an any level that will severely interfere with the amp.

Powered sub woofers have gained some acceptance so we will see what powered speakers does in the future.

I have no interest in them, if that's of any use to you.