Danny, if you're saying that WotC bungled the release and marketing of 4E, I agree. If you're saying that 4E was too far removed from "traditional" D&D, I somewhat agree. If you are saying that 4E should not have been different from traditional or 3.5 D&D, I disagree.
4E definitely did could have been different from traditional or 3X and been much more successful than it turned out to be.If you are saying that 4E should not have been different from traditional or 3.5 D&D, I disagree.
I don't think the problem is whether or not they're looking for errors. What people might be griping about is the volume of it. If there's too much errata, then it's an indicator they didn't build/test properly before publishing. And, given the rules are codified in physical books that we buy and hold in our hands, errata is a pain in the ... Either you have to carry around printouts and remember which printouts contain which errata, or you have to fill your books with sticky notes, or mark them up with pen or whatever. Or wait until the errata is codified in a new print run, and buy the same books all over again.
Selling devoted fans playtest drafts, just so you can sell them the finished versions later as well is a pretty crappy way to treat the people who care enough about the products to put in the effort to improve them.
But isn't the errata free?
Regardless, for me I still like that if they see something that needs to be fixed (either because they missed it or because the vast sea of gamers and their character optimization boards found a legal loophole) they try to fix it. It's much preferred to systems that have problems that never get addressed.
By the time the material is released in a corrected form that is clean and polished the customer is expected to buy it again.
Now if WotC comes out and says "we're abandoning print b/c our electronic revenues are 2x, 3x, or some other multiplier greater than their book sales then it's a rational business transformation. What evidence (slight & often anecdotal, I'll admit) exists today, however, paints a far less rosy picture.
Fair enough, bit IMHO, there's a significant difference between the opinions of staff and the observations of owners who get to see where all of the dollars and cents are going...or NOT going.