Why would Emacs turn down the possibility of adopting new user interaction concepts? It's not like we have to choose between "point" and "cursor", both concepts can coexist.
I find it funny to characterize Emacs as "evolving". There's been a lot of internal work, and some new features over the years, but almost all of the evolution happens on the Emacs ecosystem, not in Emacs itself. Core Emacs isn't evolving. Default Emacs is nothing more than a blank slate. And there's no clear, easy way to go from "blank slate" to "useful tool". It's either opting for one of the big config packages such as Spacemacs or Doom Emacs, or keeping Emacs as an Elisp playground (and I'd argue that an Elisp playground isn't a tool anymore, it becomes a goal in itself before it can be useful as a tool).
I find it funny to characterize Emacs as "evolving". There's been a lot of internal work, and some new features over the years, but almost all of the evolution happens on the Emacs ecosystem, not in Emacs itself. Core Emacs isn't evolving. Default Emacs is nothing more than a blank slate. And there's no clear, easy way to go from "blank slate" to "useful tool". It's either opting for one of the big config packages such as Spacemacs or Doom Emacs, or keeping Emacs as an Elisp playground (and I'd argue that an Elisp playground isn't a tool anymore, it becomes a goal in itself before it can be useful as a tool).