The biggest problem with DnDNext as it's currently conceived isn't that it cleaves too closely to one or another of the game's previous editions, nor is WotC's biggest challenge to win back whatever share of the RPG market they've ceded to direct competitors like Paizo.
Simply put, WotC's gotta make a game that appeals to a general audience, the members of which have grown accustomed to amenities like iOS apps and TV OnDemand. And while these kinds of things have been competing for our free time with traditional RPGs, in general, and DnD, more specifically, the relationship needn't be wholly antagonistic.
I started playing DnD sometime around the release of 2E, and my biggest complaint's always been that the game's a logistical nightmare. Finding three or more people who're both willing and able to play on a consistent basis just isn't easy. And since I've no interest in leaving the comforts of my (or my friends') home to meet with utter strangers in a not-so-local FGLS, LFR's not a tenable solution for me, as it's not, I imagine, for many others who post here.
I should be able to (A) fill out a simple online questionnaire that gauges how I like and when I'm available to play; (B) get matched up with people around the globe whose answers are compatible with my own; and (C) game with them via video-conferencing software. To facilitate this, a good VTT can and should be added with options like dice-rollers and customizable avatars, for which I'd personally be more than happy to pay, were they unlocked only through micro-transactions.
I strongly believe that unless and until WotC avails themselves of new technology to solve what have been and still are problems with the traditional PnP RPG, there's little point in arguing, say, whether Vancian or non-Vancian magic's better. Even if DnDNext's able to satisfy all parties involved in this board's discussions, which is highly unlikely, so far as I can tell, the game would still fail to appeal to a vast majority of its potential consumers.