Initial impressions of GNOME 3.0 from the people testing is was hugely favourable. There was a lot of positive feedback. Only after the release there was a lot of negativity.
With the knowledge you have now, loads of decisions could've been improved. It seems that is what you're suggesting? Which comes across as a bit petty.
Obviously the people testing it were testing it because they don't mind change. But one doesn't rule out another. I believe GNOME 3.0 is great, people will love it and that change is annoying. There is no conflict in these things.
Suggest to read up on how change is usually accepted to better understand what I mean. One example is for instance change due to company restructuring. In any case, the after the fact 'one of my thoughts is right' is pointless.