Robert,
as you might be already aware, most people use BIAB+DAW combination. A few years ago, I suggested same idea. Combine BIAB +RB... Unlikely to happen. The main issue, people who use RB are way too forgiving, or they are too deep in it. Because there were no hard demands, and the fact that it came as a complementary software, it wasn't developed aggressively when needed. Starting about 10+ years ago. As a result, it is what it is. Given democracy of Windows systems, it will likely stay "alive" for years to come, but personally I have not seen any major developments of that software since I started using BIAB. I would open RB every year, spend 30-40 minutes trying to like it, and close it till next.

BIAB is the main software across the board. (PC or Mac users). In 2024 Track view was introduced in BIAB...
All that needs to be done is make those tracks record audio / MIDI properly. Up to standard. As most audio software do. Just finish it the right way! Ironically, most (if not all) functions are in place. With 2 dozen available tracks, BIAB could become a "To-Go" all in one software for singer/songwriter that would need 2-12 tracks for their instruments or vocals. If one needs more features, there are many full fledge DAWs out there, free and/or inexpensive.

JAOM
"i'll throw out a challenge...
have a core group of pg users come up with a groovy new gui philosophy..."

It seems you didn't read what I said about UI. Good design is closely tied to workflow. It has little to do with "grooviness". Often times less is more.

Here is an eye opener:
Has it occurred to you that if PGM had the invested more in modernizing outdated UI + workflow design and minimizing redundancy, it would very likely have a much bigger and diverse "Core Group", and odds are we would not have this conversation. Judging from combination of user requests and outcries from this forum and what "internets" say, this makes perfect sense to me.