To go further, if 5E appeals to you, is it ok if it doesn't appeal to others and a(not necessarily the current) schism in the community continues? How much are you willing to sacrifice, or are you willing to sacrifice at all, getting what you want for the sake of the game appealing to most everybody?
Your question presupposes that sacrifices are needed, and I'm not actually convinced that they are.
If you visit sites like rpgnet, for example, what you see is a strongly held view that 3e/Pathfinder fans want a highly complex and unbalanced system that discourages teamwork. To them, "compromise" in Next would mean accepting needless complexity and vast power differences between classes and races and spells in the name of unifying the fan base, which they for the most part aren't willing to countenance.
At comparable 3e/Pathfinder-friendly sites, what you see is a strongly held view that 4e fans want a simplistic Diablo-type game that jettisons history and flavor to provide bland and overly similar classes, powers, etc. To them, "compromise" in Next would mean a needless dumbing-down of the system and a continued aping of MMORPGs in the name of unifying the fan base, which they for the most part aren't willing to accept.
I'm not convinced either view is correct. As somebody who plays and enjoys both 4e and 3e/Pathfinder, I think 4e is better-balanced, but this came at a cost: a rigid standardization that makes classes, powers, etc far more similar than they need to be. (The ways in which 4e achieved greater simplicity and a greater emphasis on teamwork came at a cost, too.) So I think many of the objections lodged against 4e really have more to do with the way in which 4e achieved its stated objectives of balance/simplicity/teamwork than with the objectives themselves, leading to misunderstandings on both sides about who wants what and why.
Balance can be achieved without rigid standardization. Streamlining can be accomplished without becoming simplistic. Teamwork can be fostered without an intense focus on minis and battlemats. And if all of these things are done, Next can potentially represent an improvement to 3e/Pathfinder and 4e fans alike.
What we shouldn't do is weigh how much less balance we're willing to accept to attract the 3e/Pathfinder community, or how much of a dumbing-down we'll endure to retain the 4e community. Those are false choices based on stereotypes rather than reality, in my view at least.