I really don't understand what's going on in SDL... it looks like the product roadmap is upside-down.
In the last years SDL brought several releases with some significant functionality changes (sometimes even breaking or at least negatively impacting changes!), but officially called "Service Releases" (which would - by its name - an average user expect to contain rather some bugfixes only)...
...and on the other hand we have major Studio release, which - looking at the list of changes and their definitely-not-groundbreaking practical benefits for users -  is rather just a bugfix- or service release...

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Studio 2019 changes are useless... I'm just saying that from the user perspective they are

• rather cosmetic (e.g. the new project creation wizard... and BTW, the wizard GUI is really UGLY... e.g. one can't tell whether a button is disabled, enabled-but-not-focused/selected, or focused/selected... due to the web-ish design which does not fit in the otherwise desktop-ish Studio GUI)
• or rather a "nah, finally!" bug- or design fixes (e.g. the verification results FINALLY showing info which is actually useful for the user)
• or basically unneeded or like "heh, seriously?!" (e.g. the quick add files, which a) everybody was doing for years already, and b) is still so hidden from users that noobs won't discover it anyway and still ask the same questions as before... or the ask me anything wannabe-copy-of-Office-feature, which is implemented in such clumsy way (the separate window instead of seamless integration in ribbon like in Office) that it feels very funny)

and they simply don't justify the price for major upgrade.
Users don't care how many internal under-the-hood changes there possibly were... users care about visible functionality.

What I would expect to happen now is that the changes which are obviously bug- and design fixes are ported also to Studio 2017 as SR2.

I truly don't believe that at the time of the betas there would be any chance to change anything based on user voices regarding designs or in-/excluded features. It's too late. I do know something about the development process.
That's one of the reasons I did not post any feedback to the beta forum - simply because it makes no sense there; only minor changes can be achieved there. The beta period is too short, therefore it simply CANNOT accept any significant changes; the entire beta is just for "public" testing and making sure that things work as designed (and signed-off way earlier).
And the other major reason was my holiday overlapping with significant part of the beta period... the earlier part... i.e. again, no point raising my voice at a time of beta 4...

Again, don't get me wrong, I understand that some (even significant) changes happened under the hood, but IMO this should have been either loudly marketed to justify the upgrade price for so minor user-visible changes, or the release should not have been major, but rather some SR.
My point of view, nothing more...

When I wrote "I would expect the fixes to be backported", I - unfortunately - already knew that it's highly unlikely to happen.
Such trend is clearly observed in the last years - push only forward, don't look back, hardly ever care about loyal long-term users of older version... Which would be perfectly fine if the licensing would be subscription-based, not perpetual...

The chase for new users (without a clue about the historical context, thus accepting anything and disposed to pay even for sloppy stuff either because it's trendy and cool, or simply because they are clueless) is evident.
But the "old farts" do remember. And feel somehow disappointed and... ummm... betrayed.