BIP-0360 and what it says about Taproot improvements

I am currently studying Taproot and see its benefits about the application of Schnorr Signature scheme, i.e. key aggregation. I just understood that there are 2 spending paths of pay-to-taproot (P2TR), the key path, which in many cases takes advantage of the possibility to aggregate signatures. Then the alternative spending path: script path. There's also the advantage of having the same address length, which makes, single sig, MuSig or other complicated addresses indistinguishable. Better for privacy.

BIP-0360 proposes the implementation of pay-to-merkle root (P2MR), which is the use of only the script path, essentially. And it was done due to P2TR being vulnerable to long exposure attack.

screenshot from BIP-0360

Bummer!

So, how can we take advantage of the use of Schnorr signature scheme moving forward? How about those who don't actually use MuSig2 and other complexities, creating a single sig wallet address only? Are they just better off avoiding P2TR then? Are there developers working to still implement Schnorr signature scheme for single key wallets, in a way less vulnerable to the long exposure attack highlighted by BIP-0360?