Generally when you introduce mechanical or electrical complexity into a system, you increase its' likelihood of failure exponentially. I think that people who play in remote locations will be the last in the world to adopt relatively high-complexity solutions such as electric suits.
Low-tech is simple and predictable in function *and* in failure. A failed insulation layer can be dealt with; a failed fuel cell could be a death sentence.
I think that divers are necessarily forced to accept complex mechanical and electronic systems for life support, and as such are more likely to be open-minded to relying other complex systems. In the backcountry, on the other hand, part of the allure is independence from these exact systems. Keeping yourself alive without needing or having to trust machines or electric circuits.
I also think that there's a difference in "escapability" between diving and mountaineering. In general, a diver isn't 24-120 hours from safety. (More like minutes or even seconds, depending on the dive.) Granted, failure in the breathing (and backup breathing) system is ultra-critical to a diver, but failure in his other systems can potentially be dealt with by signaling the buddy and surfacing within a few minutes or maybe an hour. A mountaineer can need days and nights of travel to "surface."
Where alpinists and backcountry people do embrace bleeding-edge high-tech is in fabric technology. Direct-venting membranes, aerogels, siliconized fabrics, and continuous-filament synthetic insulation were generally recognized first and embraced first by climbers. As for a suit that might have valves or wiring and batteries and fuel cells, I think you'll see that everywhere else *but* the backcountry first.
