Ethernet really isn't a natural partner for realtime stuff - being irratic and unpredictable was designed in from the beginning (because it's the easiest way to recover from certain network problems). Add newer things like spanning tree rebuilds and it's a big mess.

USB on the other hand, is - in theory at least - much more predictable; the host (the controlling computer) remains in control all the time.

However, despite the intrinsically random behaviour, Ethernet is much more attractive for industrial control: it works over greater distances, can handle multiple control stations and has features like isolation of multiple grounds and differential signalling built in...and it's actually an IEEE standard.

So, it seems likely that the combination of better motion control cards using Ethernet and capabilities for dealing with irratic and unpredictable behaviour having to be better on Ethernet will make Ethernet appear better, simply because Ethernet motion controllers are able to hide things that the USB motion control cards aren't able to.

(Even in the budget area this looks like it's true; unlike the USB smoothstepper, which seems to rely on a microcontroller for everything, the Ethernet smoothstepper adds an FPGA - presumably for offloading the generation of step/direction signals.)

(Also, don't forget that the only way to get an Ethernet port on some laptops is via USB, nor that some devices actually have a USB Ethernet controller on-board)