My experience with motorcycle EFI (1500-2000 people use my work now) is that its very hard to produce results that better carbs, including fidelity of control.
I had a Honda VFR that was EFI equipped. It had a jerky throttle response just where you need it to be smooth on a bike; rolling on power exiting a bend. When I upgraded it for a Blackbird, I got one of the last carbureted ones - smooth as a babie's whatsit!
The three bikes in my garage right now all have carbs! One's a big single, and it has 2 carbs! It has immuculate throttle response.
I had a Honda VFR that was EFI equipped. It had a jerky throttle response
Possibly the worlds worst example of how to do fuel injection on a bike. The VFR's were reknowned for bad mapping, something Honda never really sorted out (although I think they did eventually). There are many better examples.
Ever ridden a bike with flat slide carbs? If you want non linear and sometimes inverse throttle response, you'll get it!
The only real place where fuel injection has been a struggle is in two strokes. Arguably this is because by the time injection came around, the motorcycle manufacturers had thrown the towel in (arguably very prematurely) on two strokes. However, Evinrude use it on their two stroke E-TEC outboard motors with immense success. They are more fuel efficient, cleaner, more performant, require less maintenance and are more reliable than their four stroke counterparts. In some ways, boat engines have a very similar mode of use as aircraft (long periods at fixed power), so I'd be amazed if there weren't some transferable technology. However, never let this detract from never mentioning the words "2" and "stroke" in the same sentence to a pilot - you think FADEC is controversial? 
Vince - virtually all the digital EFI bikes from 1988 until the mid-2000s had the same issue you experienced with jerky throttle response. Some of the Japanese manufacturers went to similar double throttle solution used on your Honda single, but for a different reason. The smaller of the two throttles per cylinder is used to soften the jerk from small throttle openings and then the large throttle opens at higher mass flow. A four cylinder bike has eight throttles. For an existing EFI engine, one solution I and others have used successfully is to set the off-idle mixture (very small alpha at all rpm) a little over-rich. If you do it carefully, it doesn't impact fuel economy too much and helps.
Going down those kinds of complex development roads with aircraft engines, as I believe Thielert and others have found, is like opening a can of worms. The end result is huge development budgets spread over very limited numbers of units. And after that, the customer has accept (or being coerced into accepting) that he's buying hardware with extra weight, planned obsolescence, and a finite service life after which it "isn't supported". Given that the big budgets for aircraft piston engine development faded when commercial air transport shifted to jets, and production volumes are not going to rise to big numbers, and the economics for light aircraft dictate multiple overhauls, I don't see it happening.
"Sophisticated" Porsche engined Mooneys needed a bigger plane to carry the engine, had significantly worse performance and if I'm not mistaken all of them ended up reengined with Lycomings. Some technical director at Porsche was quoted as saying "maybe aircraft engines are just industrial engines after all, and we're not interested in that kind of business". He undoubtedly meant it as a snide Germanic-style sideways insult, but he was actually correct that they did not understand or develop the best technical solution.
Ever ridden a bike with flat slide carbs? If you want non linear and sometimes inverse throttle response, you'll get it!
I've got a T140 Bonneville with Amal Mk2s. It seems OK.
