I noted a lot of people saying Pathfinder didn't fix the problems of 3.5.
I believe they are wrong. Most of the caster problems in 3.5 (casters do everything that other classes do, but better) does not exist in Pathfinder. Knock spells do not open locks better than a 7th level rogue can. It can't. Find Traps spell for clerics is actually worse than a 2nd level rogue, because at 2nd level a rogue can get a roll to find traps by being within 30' of one, if they so desire - it's a rogue ability choice, one that crops up at every other level. Power Attack SEEMS nerfed, until you consider that no fighter in their right mind is ever going to sacrifice more than a -5 to their attack bonus anyways, and in Pathfinder it nets them double that in damage (and there is a feat that lets them do this at range using Deadly Aim) and it is a swift action that affects all their attacks - including attacks of opportunity - until the beginning of their next round; since it scales up as the character goes up in level, at 20th level a fighter sacrifices a mere -6 to deal +12 in damage, +18 if he's using a 2 handed weapon, and if he's a critical-based fighter at 20th level...well, with a falchion as his specialized and focused weapon the absolute minimum damage he'll be doing with a normal weapon and no magical strength bonuses is +31....and he'll be tripling (not doubling, due to a 20th level class ability fighters get) that every fourth hit or so. Far more importantly, with the vast number of feats and their class abilities, they now have multiple combat options available, and are not restricted to one single build or one specific weapon to compete with casters; the attack-of-opportunity trip-fighter can now also use power attack and deadly aim to be a threat to anything nearby and with a melee weapon and with a bow or spears, and might be able to make his own magic weapons and armor to boot.
The wildshape/polymorph spells can help a druid or caster to fight well, but they cannot take the place of a fighter using those spells. Clerics cannot outfight a fighter - the two spells that made it possible are now using the same bonuses and don't grant either a strength bonus or fighter attack bonus. Even the one that does grant a strength bonus to them doesn't increase their BAB and the fighter bonuses from just their class abilities matches it without taking feats into account. And the most important part, is that if you follow the largely common-sense conversion rules, you really can add other spells and classes from 3.5 into the game - just give the spells that take the place of another class ability a serious limitation like they did with Knock and Find Traps, and it works out fine.
The grappling rules work very well; now a monk can truly shine, because they can use stunning fist (and the class based augmentations to it) to seriously incapacitate enemies just as well - and sometimes better - than casters of equal levels, and they use fighter base attack bonuses for their maneuvers and flurry of blows (which makes them no longer the dreaded 'flurry of misses'). They gain a large number of bonus feats that augment their combat ability that they do not have to have prerequisites for and don't have to spend their precious personal feats on. Even a bard can be combat effective - with a whip and a few feats, they can trip attack almost as well as a monk or a fighter, while still giving all the other character in their party buffs with their performances after 7th level (something that was impossible in 3.5). Paladins received potent abilities for healing, and their smite evil ability isn't a one shot deal now - it lasts until he rests and regains his smites, or his opponent is defeated....meaning if the opponent runs away and comes back an hour later, he's still going to be smote hard by that paladin.
Finally, there is no longer a 'caster dependence' on magic items or on healing after 7th level. The Master Craftsman feat allows any character class to create Wondrous Items or Magic Arms and Armor. If a player chooses to, their fighter can craft his own magical armor and swords, even with special abilities. A rogue can create magical tools and protective items if he so desires. And the fact that Use Magic Device can be used by any class, means that wands are freely usable by any class that takes the ranks in the skill, and after 10th level they are pretty much guaranteed to be successful in using said wand - which means Cure Serious Wounds, Neutralize Poison, Cure Disease, Remove Curse, and Restoration spells can be supplied by anyone who takes enough ranks in Use Magic Device and spends the gold to buy the wands in question. You are no longer doomed if you don't have a cleric or a healing-bard. But more importantly, this does not remove the playability of clerics or druids; it helps, but cannot replace them, any more than those two classes can replace the fighter or the rogues.
Since anyone can take any skill (non-class skills do not get a +3 bonus, as the only penalty), anyone can take Perception (a combination of search, spot, and listen, as well as adding taste and touch), anyone can take Gather Information, and anyone can take Disable Device. Sure, if it's a class skill you'll be better, and if it's a skill your class is exceptional at you'll get massive bonuses (rogues gain half their level as a bonus to Perception and disable Device concerning traps, and bards gain half their level as a bonus to any knowledge skill, which they may use even without having ranks in the skills), but all in all, out-of-combat skill use is no longer limited to rogues and bards.
Playing a character concept returned to the game, without the necessity of must-have character types - anyone can take enough ranks and spend a feat or two to disable device and search for traps, but the rogue will do it better; anyone can actually use magical devices or craft wondrous items and make a cut-rate healer out of themselves, and clerics and wizards can manage to fight well, but they can't outfight a fighter, barbarian, or a ranger. Even the instant-win spells of the past are now massive damage spells that can't really replace a barbarian or fighter in damage capacity; the few spells that can instantly win a fight are going to fail a quarter of the time at very best, and that's at very high levels anyways, when the fighter and monk and barbarian can also start to instantly win fights with their class abilities or feats.
As far as the silly things such as the infamous "Pun-Pun", infinite quarterstaves, and Locate City Nuke, those things were only possible with the assumption of a stupidly permissive GM. Any system has that level of brokenness if you presume absolute GM permissiveness, including 4e.
Most importantly, it gives the game back to the idea of fluff being as important as mechanics. Sorcerers and wizards gain all the nifty abilities they used to have to take a half dozen different prestige classes for. What seems like a silly idea (Swimming Rage, gain a bonus equal to your level to your swim checks!) becomes incredibly effective (Swimming, Climbing, and Acrobatic rage - you're not a barbarian, you're a Viking or Pirate, able to swim through the stormiest sea, causing havoc in the rigging, and chopping down the masts) and they turned the two least useful races - half-elves and half-orcs - into races that are competitive with humans (Thrag the Bard, who will chop you to pieces with his falchion if you don't like his playing - he even has a bonus to charisma). And Bards really can make you die from laughter or cry your eyes into blindness.
Yes, I like Pathfinder, and I'm ranting because most people who say it doesn't fix the reality breaking aspects of casters have really irked me. It fixes the stupidly broken things from 3.5, and makes each class competitive without making any of them obsolete due to the existence of another class. It keeps the 3.5 games alive, with support and growth. 4e is fun, don't get me wrong....I am not saying it's a bad game and to me there is no 'edition wars', just people who are opinionated. Having looked through the rules changes in Pathfinder, they are more common sense and planned out better than 3.5 rules were (a cat can still kill a commoner, but chances are slim; a commoner CAN die from a normal poisonous snake bite now). They might be house rules, but they're house rules that are comprehensive, all in one book (no separation between players book and DM's book), and didn't require the GM to do all the damn work to fix it (we're lazy bastards).
Excuse the rant.