held off awhile in commenting, but...
i really wanted to see how this developed here before posting...and it seems to have developed along the same lines as every other "code vs. no-code" discussion i've seen in the various forums.
first, read the entire R&O...there is a whole discussion on why the FCC moved in the direction they did at this time, why they ruled against keeping the code requirement, etc.
also, the CW-only sections of the various bands are still there for anyone that wants to persue CW. there is absolutely nothing stopping anyone from continuing to utilize or learn code.
IMHO, what this *will* do is bring more technically adept people into the hobby. it isn't going to bring in more rif-raff...there's no change in the rules regarding selling equipment to non-licensed personnel: which would be the solution to that issue.
many complain that the hobby is dying, while others complain the bands are too crowded...so i can't say for sure which is true.
a stat i thought was sort of revealing: there are about 700,000-something licensed amateurs in the US, and the FCC had just under 7,000 comments on this topic. for all the lamenting i see, it seems only 1% were strident enough to actually write and comment on the record...hardly a ground-swell of opposition.
second, i think this really speaks to the nature of how people see the hobby. IMHO, learning code is NOT what differentiates amateur radio operators from other hobbyists. what *does* differentiate amateurs from others is technical knowledge. i think the whole code / no-code debate has *really* been overblown into the hingepin on which amateur radio dies or lives...and i simply don't see it that way.
listen to a quasi-technical discussion on CB about the technicalities of the hobby sometime. there's little to no knowledge about the finer points of RF. i'm *not* an amateur, and i can hear the difference...and i can see it in the posts, too, for the most part.
my personal opinion is that, while morse code may have a certain usefulness under some conditions, it is by no means an efficient means of communications; and it certainly doesn't demonstrate technical proficiency. i think it's far more difficult to master the technical aspects than morse code.
that being said, i've never tested for any amateur license, specifically because i had no interest in learning morse code. i would be *far* more likely to test for it now--and i don't think i'm the only one. but if i do, i would go straight for general--because i think the test is actually (based on the question pool) a better technical demonstration of skills.
...just my opinon.