am i missing something or 1.5 don’t have row numbers in automation?
Even if you would miss them, they are still not there…
And in 1.2x, there wasn’t even a matrix-sheet available.
I meant “miss” in other meaning 
My english is far from perfect though…
I don’t know, but i found the row numbering quite useful…
Of course the grid is also very good…
are you sure? i don’t remember…
Your use of “miss” in this case was perfect. I would only have 1 or 2 corrections:
"am i missing something, or does 1.5 not have numbers in automation? "
It still sounds like they were in there in the past but now they are not anymore.
That was my interpretation of the message.
Row numbers will look very tiny if a lot of rows are used.
And if a 1000 rows are used, numbers would turn out unreadable.
Yet a raster of vertical lines seems less annoying than unreadable figures.
I checked now 1.281 and it shows row number in the automation envelope… when you click the mouse 
but in 1.5 there are no numbers…
Okay you mean the node tip-tool information does not contain that data, while in 1.28, you could see all the information of the current selected node, in the status-bar.
The info is obsolete:
The matrix represent all the lines in the pattern. The current selected row in the pattern is being displayed by a yellow marker-line in the automation panel.
It is easier to work from within the pattern editor because in there, you know exactly at which point you want a certain effect from the automation being applied at which value. So just go there in the pattern editor, then trace the marker line and set your automation value 
If you would require more of the same in a certain line-pattern, the matrix can help you out counting, using the yellow marker as an offset.
The status line in 1.281 also showed the value you have selected. In 1.5b3 you can find out the exact value by holding the Strg/Control-Key and moving over the points in the automation curve. When holding the Key and setting the point by moving the mouse vertically you can finetune the value. (showing the value is what I missed but now found out, really good solution)