If I didn't think it was really a problem, I wouldn't have spent so much time trying to find ways to solve it cleanly. :-)
By not changing how the kernel chooses to name devices, I can't break things for anyone. If they like the non-deterministic nature of device naming, and it works for them, great.
But that 0.1% you refer to, is around 20% of Dell's server sales, likewise for other server companies. Not insignificant to that userbase.
I'm not suggesting making this optional. I'm suggesting we add it into the base udev rules, where, if a platform provides additional information to help is provide "better" names, in addition to the normal kernel-provided names, that thsoe "better" names can be used too. For various definitions of "better", all simultaneously.
Yes, other OSs have this same problem too. I get to discuss the problem and approaches at solutions with them also.