Like the other guys, you fail to provide any evidence that "most people" like such and such. Yes, the trails on the east bench are more crowded - because they start in the city and in people's backyards. You can hike/walk the dog/bike on these trails after work in the middle of winter or on a lunch break. These trails are also easier than others, making them good for families, older folks, those without much time, etc. NYC's Central Park is probably more crowded than any US forest - does that mean people prefer hiking amidst skyscrapers and blaring horns over evergreens and chirping birds? The east bench is awesome as an easy-going, accessible trail system available most of the year, but no one considers it the premier hiking/biking destination in the Ogden area.
If you're going to spend the time to drive around the mountain, you're doing so because you want a more wild, natural, challenging experience. That's why Indian trailhead, Green Pond, North Ogden Divide, etc. etc. are packed every weekend throughout the summer. People that do that don't want bald, clear-cut mountains, lift towers, maintenance facilities, work equipment, etc. all over their trip. Just because you don't think this way, doesn't mean it's a small percentage of hikers that do. And Strawberry was always available for skiing.
Fair enough. Short of being a telepath I don't think we can say for sure one way or the other how important that pure solitude of nature is to everyone out there.
That said, I think we can make some reasonable conjectures. For starters, if folks aren't willing to regularly make the 15 minute drive around the mountain to get on a trail outside of the urban sprawl of a city then crossing an access road or two probably isn't going to ruin their day. Likewise, if mountain solitude is the end-all be-all for them then trails that, as you so keenly pointed out, are overflowing with people probably aren't where they're going to be. There's nothing that says "one with nature" like being on a trail with 100 other people.
That's not even to say that those trails were so naturally pristine to begin with. You don't need an access road crossing to break the precious illusion that you're out in the middle of nowhere, the houses and condos of Huntsville in the valley below do a fine enough job of that. If you want the illusion that you're alone in the wilderness then there are plenty of other places to find it within a very short driving distance, and I think that's part of the point that's being lost here. There is a lot of "wilderness" in this area and, god forbid, there's the actual wilderness that will actually get you out there alone.
It's a fine line, I get that. We don't just want to start saying "do it!" to everything to the point where the whole range is stripped bare into one giant amusement park, but that doesn't mean that any progress against nature is inherently evil any more than the formation of these ski resorts in the first place was 1000x more "evil" than what's being talked about here.
While we're on the subject of conjecture vs. facts, do you have any to back up your claim that hiking is more popular than skiing? As someone who enjoys both, I'm not sure I see it. Sure those trailhead parking lots you mentioned are often packed on the right days, but they're small parking areas. Even all three of them combined on a "packed" weekend day with perfect weather probably have less than half the number of cars as the Snowbasin lot does on a mid-week day with crappy ski conditions. I have no idea what the answer is, but I haven't seen anything that makes it obvious one way or the other especially if you're only counting hikers that want to be away from the lifts (when a large number of them are not only near the lifts, but actually riding them up to start their hike).