The problem with the sufficient demand implies implementation logic is that it doesn't work in a non-capitalist society. Or rather, it doesn't work in a society where sufficient demand from the wanting group can't be converted into rewards for the capable-of-making-it-happen group.

This is a mainly open source ecosystem. People who make applications make them because they see them as useful or good, or because they want something like that themselves.

Which is why the above notion is flawed: there can be a shitload of demand for something - if the people capable of programming it aren't interested or don't think it's worth doing, they won't. And as I said above, it seems that most devs on here, being familiar enough with Linux, know that the password protected app locking just isn't secure enough to be truly secure.

The one guy that seems to have wanted that kind of against-the-non-persistent-casual-user protection did make an app for it - (s)he just preferred the hide instead of password prompt approach. That doesn't mean that there isn't as many people wishing for password prompt.

In fact, the very fact that it's been "discussed and debated to death" shows there's demand, or people wouldn't keep bring it up.