This will be a great showcase of self-reference. It has the great danger of give some people the false sense that what a few people who frequent this newsgroups think matters a lot, or that such thinking is representative in any way, of the overal Rhino user base. This is a textbook definition of an echo chamber.
If you study just a little bit the amount of damage that the Amazon review system is doing to good work, good products, good and ethical companies; you will be shocked. Amazon reviews are the biggest scam of this decade, after Facebook.
Anika, both of those comments reflect a genuine effort on your part to help, and that’s very appreciated, but they also show a tendency to over-simplification in a effort to make a user research effort approachable, low effort and low cost. This is the reason why most companies ship junk. Why all relevant (and most important) nuance to make excellent products is lost.
Example: I bet this is the reason why some newer “modern CAD” products exist. I’m sure they have lots of data, checklists, and ranked mechanisms that assures its development team that they are working on the right things. They are victims of group-thinking, and echo-chambers. If you believed their narrative you would think all product design today is generative metal 3D printed spaghetti. And they lack the vision and the pursuit of excellence so they are confident that focusing on the trendy, the subsidized, and the popular gives them a chance to be successful.
I say, let’s focus on the excellent, not the popular. Let’s study why it’s obscure. And what needs to be done so it isn’t. Obscurity and mostly unaccessible UI is the reason why good stuff is not more successful. It’s the reason why so much mediocrity exists in tools, training, professional development, and end-results. Let’s work to end that!