So. You aren't trying to make a point. This thread is just for the lolz?
Nearly every version has examples of play. How is one example better than another, version to version?
Believe it or not, previous editions had a table of contents and index for ease of rules reference.
How is it better (as you say) than previous editions?
"Stuff" ..... yeah. How is "stuff" more comprehensive and authoritative than previous editions?
Go hang out on D&D Beyond's Discord channel and tell me that again (it's a stream of constant typos and errors found by players).
More evocative of all the fantasy genres than earlier editions? Nope. The lastest art will never touch Erol Otus, Dave Trampier, Jeff Dee and Larry Elmore.
If 2024 is a masterpiece, then the D&D Rules Cyclopedia should be worshiped as holy writ, because it's the benchmark of what D&D is meant to be. WotC has never made the commitment to high-level play that is offered in the RC. No rules for land-owning PCs. No rules for building powerful alliances. No rules for establishing strongholds and kingdoms. No rules for waging war against monster hordes or rival nations.
In order to be the best, the game has to offer the best options. WotC never has.