I could post a really lengthy note about this, but here's the bottom line. Not everyone has been on Apple as long as I have, so this cycle may seem new to them. It's not.
This is how Apple works with software. They invent something or buy something, and its amazing but kinda basic -- take any 1.0 version of any Apple program as an example.
Over the years, they build it up with extra features -- but eventually it gets unwieldy and not particularly use-friendly anymore. Most other software companies just keep going with that, and you end up with something like MS Office or Photoshop that takes ages to load.
Apple takes a different approach. Periodically, they destroy or start over on programs that have gotten this way. Sometimes they replace it with a reinvention of the entire app (iMovie, FCP, AppleWorks, and now iTunes), sometimes they just kill it outright (iWeb, iDVD and about a hundred other things).
The replacement program might be labelled 11.0 or whatever, but in fact it's a 1.0 all over again, and is "missing" a lot of stuff that was in the previous version. And there is much wailing and gnashing of teeth and cursing of Apple and the women do lament and the children do suffer.
Then, Apple over the course of a year or so builds up the new paradigm to the point where it is awesome, not yet too bloated, but all the important features back and the new workflow REALLY IS an improvement on the old one.
Lather, rinse, repeat. See previous comparisons of iMovie '07, FCP X, the 680x0-to-PPC, PPC-to-Intel, iTools/Mac.com/MobileMe/iCloud or for that matter when Adobe dropped Pagemaker and Framemaker and went with InDesign. Oh the wails and cries! Oh the shaking of fists in a skyward direction! And then a year or two later 99 percent of users are happy again.
So if you think of iTunes 11.0 as a 1.0 of that new infrastructure, then you'll notice that 11.0.1 that was just released has started "adding back" features that were dropped in the previous version. The pattern repeats.
I have found it best to be patient, and offer constructive feedback about features that should be reinstated. The change is disruptive, particularly the way Apple does it -- but in nearly every case I can think of, the change was ultimately better than what was left behind. Eventually.
Oops, kinda got lengthy after all, didn't I?
