Well Joe, that is a good question. You could spend a lot of time and or writing in discussing it. Some changes are good or bad depending on your view as you say. For example, smartphones are both. While they give you access when needed, they also give others access to you when you may not want to be accessed. There was also a study done with students visiting a museum and then being asked some questions about what they saw afterwards. Those without a camera (or smartphone snapping selfies) remembered more than those with one. If your nose is in your smartphone, you are not looking at what is in front of you.
The internet has made research easier and that I consider fully a good thing. However, it has also made pre-booking hotels etc. easier and that I do not consider always a good thing. I am not a fan of pre-planning travel unless it is a one destination trip. I prefer flexibility. You on the other hand note that 'planning is much easier'. You assume that is a plus. For me it removes spontaneity, flexibility and much of the 'adventure' of travel. An adventure by definition requires two things. Risk and the unknown. Planning is an attempt to remove both of those in most ways.
In the same sentence you mention there are 'less surprises'. You obviously are seeing that as a 'good change'. Again, I see it as a 'bad change'. Almost all the most memorable and best things I have encountered in travel have been surprises in some way. One definition of boring would be a life without surprises.
I know there are sometimes some bad surprises that can happen. But how you react and adapt to those situations often turn out to be both self-enlightening and your best dinner party stories. "That which does not kill us, makes us stronger." F. Nietzsche
I have 'seen the elephant' three times while travelling and each time it has been a positive experience in the end. But those kind of bad surprises are far fewer and farther in between than surprises that were positive right from the start. If we try to avoid surprises because there might be the odd bad one, we also avoid all the more likely good ones.
There is also the brainwashing of people today into believing that if they don't book ahead, they will not get a room at all or it will not be at the 'best' (simply meaning lowest) price. Neither of those is true but most people believe they are. This brainwashing has also resulted in a lot of travellers who put price ahead of everything else. Many have lost the ability to distinguish between 'price' and 'value for money.'
Consider air travel. Time was when you had to have some serious money to afford to fly. Airlines originally had only one class and that was First Class. Then came along some low price airlines like Freddie Laker's who introduced prices for the masses with all seats being what we call Economy Class. I'm not quite old enough to remember that but I am old enough to remember when Business Class was first introduced. So then we had First, Business and Economy. Now some airlines have even more classes with things like 'Premium' Economy.
Airlines have to survive and to do that, they have to give the people what the people want. That's one reason why the saying, 'the people get what they deserve' is often a negative. If people are only interested in finding the lowest price, then an airline has no choice but to lower their prices. The problem is, that to do that and still make a profit, they also have to lower the service they provide. So we get narrower seats, less legroom, no free food, drinks, blankets, pillows, earphones, etc. etc. Less comfort and less included. That may get you a lower price but it doesn't get you better 'value for money.' Today in real terms, flying is cheaper than it has ever been in history. But flying has also become less and less enjoyable at the same time. That is a change for the worse.
As I said, you could spend a lot of time discussing what has got worse or better about travel joe.
Jan55612, I agree that when you stay in a place more than a couple of days, you do start to 'settle in'. Living, residing, at home, etc. are just words in the end but it is the individual's belief of where they are in relation to those words that matters. Hard to describe. Let me give you an example.
I went to a place and after 3 days, thought as a visitor I had worked out how things 'worked'. At least from a visitor/tourist's viewpoint, that seems to be about how long it takes to work out some simple basics on a vacation. Then after 3 weeks, I thought I really had a handle on how things worked. Then after 3 months, I was sure I knew all I needed to know to live there. Finally, after 3 years, I realized I was only beginning to understand the place, the people and the culture. I knew I was getting there because locals were referring to me as a local vs. other 'foreigners' but I knew enough to know there was more I did not know than I did know at that point.
So the question would be, when if ever did I move from being a traveller, to a resident or to it being my home? At 3 weeks, I might have considered I knew enough and was doing the things that made me believe I was a resident. But looking back after 3 months I would have said I knew nothing after 3 weeks and was really just a visitor still. Looking back from 3 years at where I was after 3 weeks, would have probably made me laugh at how little I knew about living there.
Perhaps where I am really headed is to the understanding that we are always travellers no matter how long we stay in a place unless we are born, live and die in the one place. OR we have to believe that where we are now is home regardless of how long we are there for. It's all just a state of mind.
