First of all VSR Tools is incomplete. A lot of its functionality is technically seen nice, but has little practical meaning, such as Multiblend and many of the Scan-to-Surface functionality. However the Analysis part is of much higher importance. Static highlights,Deviation analysis etc. Other important functionality is basic functionality like surface split,curve projection or improved control point tweaking.Looking unspectacular, but very useful. Its the opposite development of most CAD development which targets on automation, which almost always comes with drawbacks. Automation means to swap controllability and quality for speed. Its more popular as well, it promises higher efficiency.
It think we agree on the fact VSR usefulness was not communicated well enough. VSR is enhancing not replacing native Rhino commands. But if you lack the specific knowledge about this tool it doesn’t necessary mean that this tool is bad. The issue with class A modelling is, that you need to know its principles. Approximation over Interpolation is one of them (->naked edge problem)
If you don’t know and apply them, maybe because you don’t need it or you don’t know them yet, you’ll come to the conclusion that its worthless. And it definitely is for many applications.
But once you know it, then you won’t like to model specific shapes in plain Rhino, because its way too complex and slow.
If you ask me, Since Rhino is a direct modeller, I prefer a further development regarding shape quality and better analysis. The focus of both X products is improving efficiency. But looking at the cps you clearly see the tradeoff. Since working with heavy surfaces leads to problems further down the stream, a low CP count improves efficiency as well. So what you save on work in first place, will catch you later.