Then you are missing the chance to simplify things though.
In IPv6 most ISPs (except very large ones) are assigned one /32, which they can then subdivide how it fits their network.
Every LAN gets it's own /64 (now one could debate if that should be smaller or not) and one doesn't really have to think hard how many hosts one expects in that broadcast domain.. do I want a /26 or is a /28 enough?
In addition in the IPv6 case you can get away with a single route in the routing table to reach all the networks of this ISP.
Compare this to the IPv4 case where each ISP will have hundreds of /24s.
Of course if one starts with multiple sites and traffic engineering that benefit goes away a bit, but still.. for most cases it does help with routing table fragmentation.
Indeed the routing tables can be simplified with ipv6. However I believe that the current solution is optimized too much for routing tables, and not at all for end-user usability.
You can modify my proposal to have multiple 16-bit prefixes to the 32-bit range syntax, and from that /80 range you give ASs depending on size a /104, /96, or /88, or something in between. That would still leave plenty of room for the ASs to distribute addresses to customers. Maybe customers could get /8s or such, with the option for bigger customers to get larger assignments. NAT on the router could be enabled by default, reserving the range for devices which explicitly request a publicly reachable address. Usually in most networks that number should be small.
End users do not need easier IP address unless they host something. even then one can use address compressed address and DNS.
The thing with IPv6 is it very different than IPv4, as such how we use it should not be compared with IPv4.
My ISP gives /64 for CPE and the internal routing is very easily setuped. My devices in the hotspot has different IPv6 address, VMs have different IP address. The communication between the devices happen locally without any NAT.
In IPv6 most ISPs (except very large ones) are assigned one /32, which they can then subdivide how it fits their network. Every LAN gets it's own /64 (now one could debate if that should be smaller or not) and one doesn't really have to think hard how many hosts one expects in that broadcast domain.. do I want a /26 or is a /28 enough?
In addition in the IPv6 case you can get away with a single route in the routing table to reach all the networks of this ISP. Compare this to the IPv4 case where each ISP will have hundreds of /24s. Of course if one starts with multiple sites and traffic engineering that benefit goes away a bit, but still.. for most cases it does help with routing table fragmentation.