While TOGAF is not inhibiting a different EA thinking, in fact it inadvertently stimulates that, TOGAF is still hindering the take off and the development of other approaches.
TOGAF not only ignores but competes with the other EA approaches rather than collaborating and integrating the best of breed for the good of the enterprises of this world.
People actually think that TOGAF "must" be good because it has so many brand names behind, because of its many followers in IT, because of its many vocal backers whose interests are intertwined with TOGAF, because it has the dominant training and certification market share, because it has its own conferences... and, not least, because so many employers demand it choosing to trust it on faith at own peril.
So much so, that people gave up the last of critical thinking. They surrender to TOGAF.
The victims are all other EA frameworks which have little chances to surface or survive in the market left.
The victims are too the EA architects who struggle to deliver and, ultimately the customers, the enterprises which, after investing in TOGAF, don't get value as advertised and expected.
The big issue is that while TOGAF has established its strong EA monopoly, it doesn't really deliver EA, holding the discipline back as such because TOGAF is an IT solution architecture development process augmented by a plethora of best practices, such as risks management..., which are not really part of EA.
You follow the process, you end up with what your requirements stated in the first place, a solution rather than an EA. That is because TOGAF replaces strategy (term barely mentioned in the TOGAF tome) in driving the enterprise transformation, with requirements which typically drive solution development.
To become useful not only successful, the TOGAF club should open to the world. It should be open to suggestions and contributions from anyone without membership fees. For the good of everyone every other framework should be considered for enhancing TOGAF if it benefits.
TOGAF should be a method open to innovation, given its supposedly open membership, rather than a tool for milking the cash cow.
The work of Open Group should be transparent to the public. The TOGAF roadmap should be published for everyone to know where TOGAF is going.