Perhaps a better question is, will changing the default result in a better Emacs? Any change which auto-destroys text, the very thing we entrust to Emacs, should be regarded with extreme caution. For example, how many newbie users have experienced a sudden highlight all/one key stroke/everything is gone event? I've seen it happen over and over again. The rage, frustration, disbelief is palpable. Why invite that experience into Emacs? Is that really better?
Making Emacs work like Windows is not a valid argument. Emacs can never work like CUA (Common User Access) and still be fully useful (and still be Emacs). There is a CUA mode for Emacs, it's not very popular because it overrides so much of what makes Emacs work like Emacs. Emacs is keyboard driven and fixed font width text oriented. Windows is mouse driven and WYSIWYG oriented.
Emacs predates Windows. Forcing every experienced Emacs user (destroy text, rage quit, then) undo a new default goes against more than culture, it begs the question, why even use Emacs? For the configurability? Then turn on the delete-selection-mode in the configuration yourself.
But to answer the question, there are many, many workflows, with the primary commonality that they are keyboard driven, not mouse driven. Here is but one, all done with the keyboard, no mouse required. I do this workflow every day, many times a day, while writing code and editing data. It is simply bringing a few lines from another point in a file and then continuing composition.
Set point near desired text
Move Point, highlighting text
Cut or Copy
Exchange Point and mark, moving to end of pasted text
Continue text entry after highlighted region (oops all the pasted text is gone!)