IJS is an improvement as it's meant to be less subjective, but where people are doing single jumps and level 1 spins, it's not that helpful.
Interestingly, in the Canadian competitive track, all spins and step sequences are called L1 in our two lowest levels, regardless of where they would be under the strict application of the rules.
I find that CPC is quite useful in the lower levels (we are now using it in test track as well) as it allows the skater, coach and parents to see where strengths and weaknesses lie. The OBO system doesn't give you an idea of how you are relative to other skaters; it simply means that based on the variety of rankings of the judges, you happened to work out to be 1st, 2nd, etc. Since we've been getting detail reports, I've seen skaters able to identify that their skating skills were above/below standard; that their lutz is/isn't a flutz; that their spins do/do not count; that they are indeed doing a difficult entry and excellent technique; etc. With OBO, you couldn't tell.
We are also seeing some shifts in placements. With the visible score given to the PCS, it means that skaters with strong skating skills and good interpretation are seeing that aspect being rewarded, and there is less "sole emphasis" on landing jumps at any cost. The kids who were cleaning up with the jumps are now finding that they have to have a more complete package, and it is also lessening the "SHE was in FIRST! But, I LANDED MY DOUBLE LOOP and SHE didn't have any doubles" debates, as the skaters can see exactly why such and such came first.