I'm a little weary of dealing with traditional Catholics who claim that the pope has given Bishop Fellay everything he asked for.  Let's take the 1987 Motu Proprio for starters: Here's what Article 5, item #1 of the MP says.  (For me, Article 5 gets at the heart of Summorum Pontificuм):

"In parishes, where there is continuously present a group of the faithful,(read "stable group" in some translations), attached to the previous liturgical tradition, let the pastor willingly receive their petitions that Mass be celebrated according to the Rite of the Missale Romanum issued in 1962. Let him see to it that the good of these faithful be harmoniously incorporated with the ordinary pastoral care of the parish, under the governance of the Bishop according to canon 392, by avoiding discord and by fostering the unity of the whole Church."

Some observations:
1) First off, the parish must contain a group of the faithful "attached to the previous liturgical tradition, who petition the pastor for a TLM.
   a. Nothing in MP provisions, forces a pastor to recognize or follow through on any such petition.  No enforcement provision, for that matter, prevents the bishop from refusing any such petition.
   b.  If no such group exists, the pastor is not obligated to introduce or schedule a TLM on his own.  If the pastor himself requests that one be introduced, nothing in the MP prevents the bishop, (as mentioned above) from refusing such request
2.  No word about obligatory scheduling of Traditonal Masses.  If allowed, they could be slotted in at any time of the night or day, and not necessarily, even, on Sundays.
 3) The language of this Article is so nebulous, that both the bishop and pastor have enormous latitude in interpreting its provisions in any way they please.
    a. e.g. "Let him (the pastor) see to it that the good of these faithful be harmoniously incorporated with the ordinary pastoral care of the parish, under the governance of the Bishop."  The pastor may decide what being "harmoniously incorporated" means, and it may, for him , not necessarily mean providing a TLM venue.
    b. It is in no incuмbent upon the bishop, under his "governance," to allow a TLM upon pain of censure or disciplinary measures which might be taken against him.
3) The pastor and his bishop may decide, according to Canon law #392, that in the interests of "avoiding discord" and  "fostering" unity in a given diocese or parish, it might be judged prudent not to provide for any TLM at all.
3) Everything about SP is in the subjunctive.

Finally, and this is the kicker for me), where do you find the TLM, because of B16's MP, really taking hold in any major Catholic diocese of the world?  I don't.  Please let me know if in your diocese the MP is making any significant headway.  From my perspective, it's not happening.  So, what did B16 really give to +F?
 

That's it?  One post thus far?  There aren't some Catholic folks out there in cyberland who can testify how the TLM has taken off in their respective dioceses as a result of the MP?  Gooollly!  Hey, Stevus, where are you?