I'm a fan of tapes too, partly because in the SMB space even the dumbest luser can change a tape, but changing out a disk drive on a Windows system *always* seems to be problematic.
Usually you're stuck with USB for ease of use, and even USB2 blows for throughput and I have yet to see a new server with USB3. And then there's the whole clusterfuck with drive letter assignments and the crummy job backup software does with identifying backup media vs. needing to write to some specific path (which is as much a Windows problem as anything).
Which makes me wonder why there isn't a SCSI storage peripheral that can use hard disks as removable media but looks to the server like a tape drive with some kind of translation to write to the disk. This lets you remove the whole disk management issue from the server to the peripheral disk host, as well as retaining tape compatibility with the backup software.
You could even get a little more exotic and put space for multiple disks in the peripheral and do various and sundry mirroring/RAID for redundancy and capacity.
Given the cost of LTO-5 and -6 in quantity, it's probably not cost effective over large quantities of tape, but I would think the peripheral itself would be cheaper (solid state, largely software) and more reliable, and for many use cases, possibly faster, since it's not always easy to maintain the streaming rates necessary to eliminate shoeshining with tape drives unless you're dumping a disk-based backup direct to tape.
My only big gripe with tape is drive reliability, they seem to die more easily than even individual drives in servers and SANs. My only other complaint is the legions of morons inisisting that cheap disk is always better than tape, making you look like a dinosaur for advocating tape.