Reference
To post 19, John Farley.
The word "liking" may not have been mentioned literally, but in post 3, to which post 11 refers, I read
"I also find it very easy to fly in this way."
in post 11
"Worked for me like a charm"
in post 12 (same author as post 3)
""Ditto. When using the Russian style AH as a 'big picture' instrument, it makes far more sense."
Seems to me like a case of "they like it" .
Of course I do not deny their right to like something, but I tried to make clear why the "western style" attitude indication is more natural: the artificial horizon stays parallel to the real horizon and the wing symbols stay parallel to the real wings. In the "Russian" system, looking at an airplane symbol from "behind" the airplane, the artificial horizon stays parallel to the real wings and the artificial wings bank relative to the real wings.
If you are sitting stationary behind a PC and operate the aircraft as a model airplane, the Russian sytem is fine. But as I wrote in my previous post, if you have an outside view from your real world aircraft, in a bank there is a contradiction between the real horizon and the (Russian) artificial horizon.
I do not fight your argument that 40 or 50 years ago technology was not able to provide enough freedom of movement for gyro systems to be free of maneuvre limits. I do not think though that for commercial aviation, those were "limits" as you are expected to remain fairly close to horizontal for safety and passenger comfort.