Speculation: Perhaps they are trying to distinguish themselves from the "cheaper" products by using the "new" blue LEDs? IIRC the technology for them was figured out much later than green or red, so maybe there is a bit of leftover "futuristic" feel to them.
The last time I saw a blue room-illuminator was on an ancient Belkin Bluetooth dongle. IMO the practice has gone out of style with most name brands (including Apple).
It's basically this, yes. Blue LEDs were such a game-changer that the inventor won a Nobel prize for it. When they became cheap enough to use in consumer electronics, manufacturers went absolutely nuts and put them in everything as a sort of whiz-bang look-what-we-can-do thing. But since everyone did that, they stopped feeling distinctive almost immediately. The only designers still using them for indicators are the ones who can't tell when a fad is over. They're still very important technology for LED light bulbs; white LEDs are blue LEDs with a yellow phosphor.
ETA: I'll add that it takes real time, effort, and crucially taste to get an LED indicator to not be a retina-searing nuisance. You have to be willing to devote time to getting it right, and for someone just trying to pump out cheap units at volume, that's not an easy sell.
Looking at flashlight runtimes on battery, it seems like white LEDs (blue with a phosphor) or blue, are much more efficient per lumen than any other color. Perhaps that could be a reason as well? I'd generally prefer green and red.
I expect that has to do with the properties of the human eye, and the fact that the lumen is defined in terms of those properties. I doubt white LEDs are significantly more efficient than any other color in terms of EM flux per watt, but a relatively large proportion of those emissions are at wavelengths to which the retina is sensitive.
The last time I saw a blue room-illuminator was on an ancient Belkin Bluetooth dongle. IMO the practice has gone out of style with most name brands (including Apple).