Quoting Deli_kizin:

Well, I think that it was a good change. It did have some down-sides, but Osmanlı Turkish, didnt match the Turkish language at all. It wasnt only Arabic and Persian words that got adapted in the system, but also their grammar rules and their suffixes. So a language filled with strange grammar constructions was constructed. Also, the arabic alphabet, doesnt match the sounds of the turkish language. It lacks letters and made reading nearly impossible. Because barely anyone used diacritic points, You could get sentences such as:

Mehmet paşa oldu
Mehmet Paşa öldü.

Two entirely different meanings, not to mention the word ün, un, on, ön.. There are more than these 3 variations because sometiems an N was also written with the arabic K, and then the U like a Waw, then you can get combinations like evin too. The language was too difficult for the population and the distance between the aydınlar and population, the konuşma and the yazma dili became bigger and bigger. I think the changes were good, though Atatürk did some strange stuff (such as Güneş Dil teorisi and trying to find turkish etymologies for ALL foreing words).

Besides, in Greece the language from the ancient greeks differs much too. I can read ancient greek but not understand modern greek. In Greek highschools I think all students get lessons. Im surprised it is not like this in Turkey, but I think that it is still under the effect of the inkilap.

Quoting boradiz:

yes deli-kızın, I also think this revolutionn was needed, but it resulted in a significant less number of words to be used.
For example we are using mutlu instead of neşeli, bahtiyar, berhudar, mesut... In fact all these were expressing a different state of happiness, but today we are just mutlu