Not all programming work is done in hipster web companies following software development trends; there's a lot of employers out there who bought into proprietary VC systems a decade or more ago, and stick with them because of a combination of business needs, legacy requirements and the principle of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".
At one of my previous jobs we had to deal with a proprietary, combined version control and time reporting system that to us, developers, felt like utter garbage. Only later on I learned that it was used by our main customer because it facilitated workflows useful in a mid-to-large corp, and some of our pain points were in fact conflicts between "the developer way" and "the business at large way".
The word is used to describe companies which tend to be overrepresented in tech communities compared to industry baseline, not tools.
As for "industry-standard tools", I find it hard to use this term in our industry. There's a diverse range of practices and recommendations.
Git is popular in some subset of the industry (around web in particular), but I'm hesitant in calling it an industry-standard tool. I don't know if there are estimates around the size of it, but there's plenty of proprietary 'shadow' tooling and practices hiding under the surface.
Why would anybody do that ?