Appears to me like a couple of the things causing the most angst with the Xbox One reveal were in fact necessary evils in order to provide other features that people didn't want to go without.
People (certainly me) wanted to install games and play without the disk. People want the benefits of a physical copy (no big download, can re-install from your physical media even if it was no longer available for download, can get cheap games at retailer sales, get to own a nice box/cover), with the DD perks (instant access to all your games with no disk changing).
Xbox One has seemingly provided that, but I can't see any way they could have done so and still let us lend games to our friends. They obviously couldn't allow the scenario where friend A and friend B go halves on a game, friend A keeps the disk to play off and friend B installs and ties it to his profile to play without the disk. Essentially every sale would provide two copies of the game. Would I rather be able to buy physical and yet play all my games as though they were digital only, or be able to lend my games to my friends? For me it's worth the trade-off.
And really, the world is heading that way anyway. Can I lend smartphone apps to my friend? PSN/XBLA/Games on Demand games? Steam games? DLC? No. I don't see it as a big issue. I can play my games, online or offline (for a time?) on my console, as can anyone else who uses that console, and I can play my games anywhere else as long as I sign in. Seems reasonable, and lots of other platforms are doing it.
Regarding used games, given the way games are tied to accounts, Microsoft could easily have said "fuck it, no used games" and blocked them entirely. But, all signs indicate they are providing a way to deactivate games and resell them, and allowing us to buy and play used games, which most of us wanted. Guess what? That's reason for the "always online" the internet is so upset about. Sure, it would be nice if we could play our games offline on the console they were purchased on indefinitely, and that may have been the case, but we would have to have accepted a complete block on used games. You expect Microsoft to let people go offline, then sell their whole collection but continue to play it indefinitely?
Lending our games to friends or playing without disks (physical with the perks of DD)?
Complete used game lockout or occasional authorization checks?
We can't have it both ways, and I feel Microsoft has picked the better option in both cases. The negative reaction is way overblown. If they didnt do these things people would likely be even more upset with the other outcome. Of far greater concern is that Microsoft seems to have positioned gaming as a minor focus of the system, and that it looks like it might be significantly under-powered compared with PS4. But that's another story.
