So why bother making replication able to replicate schema then? There is only one schema change that replication cannot handle -- dropping tables that are part of a publication. Why would Microsoft program CRM to drop tables to add a column? Why would you ever want to do that? Ignore exceptions (that in my opinion are bad form anyway) -- what possible reason is there for a professional product to drop a table whenever you want to add a column? That's the core of my rant.
I think the CRM problem is an extension of the problem you have with SSMS. MS was all but cornered into making the Table Designer be the way it is with respect to schema changes for the reasons mentioned earlier, and CRM seems to follow that same least common denominator approach. Do I like it? No. I get the starting point of your rant but for me, knowing why something I do not like is the way it is sometimes makes it easier to accept ;-) At least it is documented.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________There are no special teachers of virtue, because virtue is taught by the whole community. --Plato