This is clearly a matter of taste. The question, which is faced by all sports, is when is a game "mature"? Put simply, most games evolve from their beginnings. Using the excellent analogy provided by J.M. Evensky, baseball started with underhand pitching. It went through the dead ball era, eliminated the spitter and other trick pitches etc. But ultimately it determined that wooden bats, a "live ball", bases at 90 feet a mound at 60 ft 6 inches worked. Thus while there are changes around the edges, the game is essentially the same and it is played similarly to the game that was played years ago. (don't get me started on the DH, an aberration). Pro basketball on the other hand continues to tinker. while the shot clock came in the eatly 5o's along with goal tending, 3 seconds and the like, the advent of the 3 point shot shows it is still evolving.
The question is, where is golf? In tennis, continued equipment changes have led to an increasingly boring game at the tournament level as the bigger and better weighted rackets allow western grip groundstrokes that have eliminated most net play. The players are fabulous, but their ability to display a wider variety of skills has been limited by uncontrolled equipment innovation. However that innovation may have made the game easier for the average player. I suggest it has not made it more popular. In golf, the problem is not the average player. But I submit that the new balls and clubs allow the great players the ability to swing harder and thus hit the ball much further. This in and of itself may not be a bad thing except that it requires longer courses to test the various aspects of their games. So one either accepts that the challenge will be reduced as long shots to greens disappear or one builds longer and/or tighter courses to reintroduce the tee to green challenge at the championship level. The problem is that the rest of the population plays the same courses. Of course we can move up to more reasonable tees, but the cost of maintaining the course increases. Length of rounds also are likely to increase. All for the sake of allowing continued innovation to sell clubs and balls. When Snead (or George Bayer) hit a drive with the old clubs and balls spectators knew it was a long hit. Nicklaus was devastating. I shudder to think what those playes would have done with this equipment. But the point is, a ball doesn't have to go 325 to be a big hit. It is a relative issue so long as the norms are understood. We are probably too late to put the genie back in the bottle and as a result, some great courses will be disfigured and others will not be used for championships. But it is perfectly appropriate for a rules making body to decide that its game is mature and draw a line in the sand. I would appreciate it if the line were drawn and enforced now; the USGA thinks it has been. I only regret that they are woefully late to the party.