I must say that apart from Amla I was dissapointed with the South African batting performance on the last day. He was the only one that looked like he could attack and get the Australians on the back foot. The remainder all went out not to lose the game, rather than trying to win it. The South African commentator on ABC spoke about it being very important for the south african team to win 2-0 rather than 2-1 as it would seem a more comprehensive victory. To me, they had the opportunity to win 3-0, which, while extremely unlikely was still possible. They needed 376 at a rate of 3.3ish to win, and we can't forget that Australia declared at 257, which they acheived at a rate of 3.8, only losing 4 wickets (one of which was just due to slogging at the end).
There weren't that many demons in this pitch, and I believe as soon as you try to play for a draw when the game is still in balance you deserve to win, and normally do. I feel they would have drawn if the game was still in balance halfway through they day due to positive play, instead they were a long way behind the run rate required, and a draw on Oz win were the only possibilities by then.
They could have played positively, even slightly risky, with the reward being another come from behind win against Australia and probably some mental demons being placed in the Aussies heads. Reward - 3-0 win with Aussie doubts creeping in for the return series. Risk 2-1 win while going for a win, which happened anyway. Now the Aussies are thinking 'they tried to play for a draw from a winable situation, and still didn't manage to get there'. I feel this will give the Australians, particularly young bowling team a big leg up for the return series.