It depends! For example, IPv4 did inhibit some innovation (think CNLP, OSI, IPv6, etc.), and TCP did too (probably), each at their respective layers, but TCP/I

It depends! For example, IPv4 did inhibit some innovation (think CNLP, OSI, IPv6, etc.), and TCP did too (probably), each at their respective layers, but TCP/IP produced a great deal of innovation at layers above, and that's easily worth the opportunity cost of missed innovation at the the network and transport layers. But now suppose we standardized on Java or Ada or something for app dev. That would not be good, and the opportunity cost of inhibited language development would be awful. Standardization in APIs is worse even, if you disallow extensions, but is less nasty if you do allow extensions. So, yeah, "it depends" is the best I can do for an answer. Sometimes it's possible to reduce the opportunity cost of innovation inhibition by standardizing in mature technology spaces, but sometimes a sector that appears mature is ripe for disruption, so it can be really hard to predict. And we cannot know what we've lost for quite some time after the standard is imposed. So on the whole I'm disinclined to have standardization forced on the market.