I also raise my voice in opposition to the "Forced Max" system of SAGA and Pathfinder Alpha 1. There is no good reason to change this aspect of the system, and may reasons NOT to change. Those reasons have been stated by others in this thread (most eloquently by Set), so I won't repeat them.
I do want to call out one point that hasn't been emphasized enough in this thread: compatibility. The Pathfinder system is intended to be (essentially) a replacement to the 3.5 rules when they go out of print in a couple of months. Further, they are intended to be compatible with existing 3.5 products, at least somewhat. Many other things in Pathfinder Alpha 1 are big changes, but with some very good reasons (grappling simplified, for example). The changes in skills, however, seems completely pointless. The reason stated most often (that it is easier to stat out high-level PCs and NPCs) doesn't hold up when you consider that, in 3.5, you can simply assume max ranks for all skills, and it ends up being EXACTLY THE SAME level of calculation. On the other hand, the Pathfinder Alpha 1 skill system breaks a lot of 3.5 supplements (with feats that interface with skill points, prestige classes that have skill ranks as prerequisites, etc.), so is LESS COMPATIBLE. For a reason that doesn't hold up.
I say NO. Please keep skill points.
Now, some tweaking of the 3.5 skill points system could be useful. For example, raising the number of skill points some classes have, allowing some method of gaining other class skills (a feat, perhaps), and much of the skill combining you have already done are all good, and have the added benefit of not breaking compatibility nearly as badly.
But the "Forced Max" SAGA-style system that you currently have? ABSOLUTELY NOT!
