The big characterization I'd make between USB Micro and USB-C (2014) is that USB Micro was designed for one specific task: connecting 5W power (expanded (unofficially?) to 11W) and USB2.0. USB-C is a much more abstract connector, with gobs of general purpose data & a huge range of power ranges. For data there's two pairs of highspeed differential lanes (so, 8 pins), plus some other lines, for power there's way more amps (5A) & scalable voltage (really scalable with USB EP's 48V) meaning tons of juice. These are all opt-in for use. There's a very flexible power delivery range, there's lanes designed for general high speed connection use not just USB. There were upfront designs for how to run multiple protocols, not just USB, over the connector. With USB4 there's packet level sharing, so net bandwidth can be shared in more interesting mixes than 50/50 or to many destinations at once. USB-C can do just about anything. We can keep changing our uses of it to do whatever.
It's almost hard to imagine what else we might possibly want. Intel's mobile chip's onboard thunderbolt/USB-C ports offer 40 Gbps system-to-system connectivity, while desktops are still slowly marching towards 2.5Gbit ethernet. 10Gbit connectivity is still semi exotic to anyone but hardcore compute enthusiasts, but this connector has proven itself capable of way way more already, at a clearly mass-market price point.
If there's one innovation I would like to see from USB-C and USB in general, it'd be longer connections. I'd love to see a 10Gbit USB4.x mode that works over a 6m cable, for example. I don't think the connector has much to do with the range difficulties faced by modern, high speed USB. And similarly I don't see much push to create a higher-lane count connector, but that's another possible place where USB-C proves less-than-ideal long term.