justanoldmuso.
I must confess, I am having difficulty of deciphering manuscript above. However, I believe I have a basic understanding of where you going with this.

What is not clear to me is this: "from a developers perspective". WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT?
is it a observer developer? PGM developer? Refactoring developer? UI developer?
I am not a developer. But it's clear to me as bright day that BIAB UI and workflow are not made to standards and improving on that front is painfully slow compared to almost any other software.

Is it me? Or that is what is said about BIAB in nearly EVERY unbiased review? These days people don't like facts much, but I encourage you to do some reading. Wikipedia would be a good place to start. There is a section there specifically with constructive critique.

Good design is not about "flashiness". Good design is a combination of smooth, easy to grasp workflow, properly sorted menus structure, clear wording, supporting modern resolution and multi monitors and yes, flexible elements that do not look like 2005 software.

To PGM credit, there was some breakthrough progress made in 2024. Specifically: significant generational speed improvement utilizing multi CPU cores, MTP library and a few other tools made non-modal. But then, instead of doubling on workflow enhancements, progress for the most part stopped.

JAOM, If you are happey about how things are concerning GUI (and it seems you are), there is no need to lauwer for PGM. They are big boys and girls to stand up for themselves.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From AI perspective when asked about BIAB weaknesses. #2:

2. User Interface (UI) Complexity
Cluttered UI: The interface, while functional, can appear overwhelming and unintuitive to new users. It often requires a steep learning curve to understand all the available features and options, especially for beginners.
Outdated Design: Some aspects of the software's design look quite dated, which might be off-putting for users accustomed to sleek, modern DAWs like Logic, Ableton, or Cubase.