One can hardly say the letter 'd' twice online without getting a lecture about the good old days and how D&D is supposed to be and haven't been able to for the entire quarter decade I've been playing, so I'm going to go with it being safe to say they have.
I was too, and that movement towards a different playstyle was definitely happening. But if I had my way, in 2005 or 2009 WotC would have simply made a different game not called Dungeons and Dragons that just happened to be mechanically identical to what we know as 4e and sold that game. Given how very different 4e was from all that came before it, I feel a clean break toward a game that would have suited the audience they wanted to court would have been better.
And this design decision resulted in explosive increases in sales.
No, probably not. But it might actually have been good for what we now call 4e for it not to have to live up to everyone's expectations of D&D.
WotC not trying to game the OGL and shuttering the Gleemax boards would have done more.
I literally have the word in my profile title. By all means, pick on me specifically. : )
Fair enough. To me, everything @pemerton asked for read like a supers game.
