So, I said earlier that I generally view "uniatism" as a decent role model.
And what I mean by this is that I accept any means which allows diverse liturgical rites and customs from authentic inculturation, especially over centuries to occur harmoniously with another rite which is the majority rite within a single unified Church.
And with that being said, I think its fair to say that the Western rite Orthodoxy is an advantage over Eastern rite Catholicism because in the Orthodox situation, the byzantine rite majority of Orthodox are remaining more firmly attached to tradition, whereas in the Roman communion the latin rite majority are more firmly attached to novelty and trends of protestant or humanist influence.
If one is to pick the overwhemling influence of the majority of Orthodoxy, one finds traditional christianity there, whereas overwhelming influence in the majority of those who claim to be "Roman" Catholicism is that of protestantism/modernism. Therefore more likely than one will end up being a traditional latin rite Orthodox "catholic" in communion with Moscow and more likely to be a modernist Eastern rite "heterodox" Catholic in communion with Rome.
By saying this I do not deny that attachment to older tradition does not also exist in Roman Catholicism, only that for the past few decades it has been very much attacked and weakened. In Orthodox catholicism it has had some suffering too, but not as severely (unless one takes the julian calendar into account).
Pictures like this are what await the Melkite's future if the modernists have their way, pictures like this will be how all Melkite Qurbanas will eventually look. No inconostasis, priest facing people, lady playing the guitar behind the bishop, adults and teenagers receiving chrismation instead of babies and many other modernist influences.http://www.catedralsanjorge.org.ve/album/albums/userpics/10001/4025570.jpg