Based on the numerous issues I've had with the newer field mapping view (and documented on this site), I hesitate to say it's an improvement over the old interface. One move I think it does well, though, is move toward a table-based interface:
It almost resembles the fields view, but it's less convenient than Fields view. In Fields, you get an overview of all fields and can easily edit. In field mapping--where the minutiae, I'd argue, matter more--you have to click one-by-one down the side, looking at each field individually. I understand that there are needs for different controls in field mapping, but if it could resemble the fields view in its structure by being more of a basic table, that would be useful.
