It's not, and I'd ask you to stop with the hyperbole. Enough. You can disagree with people without calling their positions absurd, rediculous, nonsense, or all the other adjectives so popular these days in Internet discussions. You know me, and the users here, enough to know we will pay attention to your opinion and take it seriously without all that stuff. You don't need to go over the top like that to get people's attention. So please, knock it off.
It's one spell per long rest. For a Wizard, they have to 1) obtain a scroll, 2) spend two hours per spell level copying it, and 3) supply 50 gp of special materials per spell level, and 4) take 8 hours of long rest, and 5) spend 1 minute per level of the spell to prepare it.
This is a very meaningful part of the wizard class. Their versatility was in that spellbook. It was rare that anyone "needed" to change more than one spell, but the ability to access more spells through that spellbook for that average-one-switch per night was critical to their versatility. And now that versatility is actually significantly worse than the sorcerer who does not have to jump through those hoops to do the same thing.
Except in practice, it's usually just one spell you'd change anyway. There are diminishing returns that ramp up quickly the more spells you're able to change because most of the spells you choose you will want the next day anyway. It was always that ability to switch a small number that was the heart of wizard versatility. Most circumstances where you'd want to change more than one, are also the circumstances where you could take more than one long rest as well.
Which is now a NEGATIVE rather than a positive since sorcerers can now do that easier and better.
Right, but they cannot do metamagic or flexible casting or any of the other nifty things sorcerers can do. Their ability to switch spells, and have access to more spells to switch too, was always a crucial element of the wizard.