The comparison for "success" shouldn't be perf v. OProfile. Comparing to portable, PAPI-based tools provides a more nuanced story. Drivers supporting PAPI (e.g. perfctr) routinely were dismissed as not having users when what really was meant was not having users vocal in Linux kernel development. Most of our uses (before 2.5, btw) were one-offs trying to figure out how to use performance counters well and had to span multiple platforms. Trying to tie the entire performance monitoring stack to a single OS was a horrible idea then. It still is, but whatever.
I've used QEMU on non-Linux. This really seems like mingo forcing some kind of Linux lock-in on otherwise multiplatform tools. There really is more to the free software world than just Linux, and some of us also need to deploy on proprietary systems. Having tools that permit trivial porting to free systems limits proprietary lock-in.