What I find funny is that people who are in favour of 5e have tried to convince me that 5e is great because there's a lot of 4e mechanics (buried somewhere) in there. At the same time they're trying to convince 4e haters that 5e is great because it's a step back to older editions.
Actually, both statements are reasonably accurate. A lot of the character abilities could be described using the "encounter" and "daily" language, if you wanted to do so (which I don't, but it could be done), short rests act a bit like healing surges, etc. So it did adopt a number of 4E's mechanics.
On the other hand, these are no longer
disassociated mechanics, or at least, no more than Vancian magic always was, and their presence has largely been toned down so you don't end up with players saying things like, "All my powers are used up, I can't do anything." 5E doesn't feel like you've got arcane sorcerers and martial sorcerers and primal sorcerers (which is how 4E always felt to me), but rather than you've got a wizard and a fighter and a barbarian...
Also, bounded accuracy makes for a much flatter power curve, which means that characters of different levels are on more even footing– which in turn means that encounters now remain challenging (or at least interesting) for a wider variety of levels, which is much closer to the feel of old games where you'd take a 1st level cleric, 3rd level fighter, 2nd level wizard, and 2nd level thief into the dungeon and have a fairly easy time on the 1st level but then it would get tougher when you went down the stairs to the 2nd level, etc.
I am actually very impressed with the way 5E has managed to have their cake and eat it too, so to speak.
-The Gneech