1) A bit longer for books in editing/playtesting. Improve the quality right out the gate.
2) An initial pass on errata fairly soon after release - catching all the mistakes that were found after the book went to press but before release.
3) A later pass on errata (say 2 months after release) to clean up whatever has been found since.
4) After that, live with it. If something is found to be so broken it cannot be let stand, then it should be removed from the game, rather than trying to fix it. Though if we get to that point, I have to ask why it wasn't caught before now.
I'm basically on board with points 1-3. Honestly, I don't think anyone can really disagree with wanting to see the products come out with less need for errata in the first place! I don't think perfection is ever possible, but I do think they can do better than they have with some products.
I'm sorry, I really think you're blowing this way out of proportion.
I have an alternative approach for your group. Call it a software fix.
...
Problem solved.
At that point, shouldn't we do something a little more constructive than pretend it doesn't bother us?
I'm a big fan of the accept-that-not-everything-in-life-is-perfect-and-make-the-best-of-what-you-have strategy, myself.
Just to counterbalance the opinions so far: I love the updates. (...) I actually wish WotC would be more aggressive with the updates--I'd like to see all the pre MM3 monsters retired or revised, for example, to make my Compendium searches simpler.

(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.