True - but this also explains why there are huge areas where one or the other falls flat.
The best things happen when the two compete to try and integrate the ideas of the other. Windows 7, for example, is (IMO) the best windows interface yet. It steals from OSX and KDE, and profits from this.

KDE 4 stole from Vista and OSX, and profited from it.

Now if we can just get them all to steal from Enlightenment or WindowMaker, I'll be happy

IMHO, KDE4 stole from Vista and OSX and turned into crap.

Yep, I use XFCE and plan "porting" KDE 3.5.10 to Slackware 13.0

LOL - well, I guess it's all how you look at it
I have a similar opinion, but then I like my DEs to be slim and out of the way. Not much use for 'widgets' or 'plasma' or 'dashboard' type stuff.

I also like a lightweight desktop, I actually prefer a plain WM. And Conky fulfills almost all my "wigdet" needs.

maybe we are getting old and "deprecated" ?
::"my oh my":: |^o^|

No, you just like functionality and nothing to distract you. I use GNOME (Even if I do use several KDE applications), and even on Windows I install and maintain I like "Windows Classic" interface used by default on Windows 2000.

I'd nearly 100% agree.

probability > random_between(70%, 80%)

And how 'bout the tweaked version of XP's Luna? I think it's more versatile than the 2000 start menu interface. Speed is not even much of a difference. Accessibility is a plus too.

Nah, colors are to aggressive and desktop background get's in majority of users way, and it happens that I like better W2k start menu. 90% of the people do not even use Start Menu, it's a VERY small number that knows at least 50% of items of the main menu without looking.

I have used Windows from version 3.0 (no mouse of course), and as prettier the GUI gets, the more confused majority of users get. I am IT tech for 10 years now, having A LOT of contact with illiterate users, and this is my perception on the issue.

And I decided to not even support Vista and Windows 7 after I got lost couple of time trying to do some simple things like changing IP address of the LAN interface, and similar tasks. It's like entering the room full of mirrors, those in circus.

Functionality without distraction is my preference as well. I, too, favored the "classic" interface for Windows until I discovered BB4Win (Blackbox for Windows).

You're right. When XP appeared with it's default Fisher Price theme I found it to be bulky and confusing, especially the Start Menu and Control Panel sections. I've tried to help a few Vista users and I can't find anything. Office 2003 vs 2007 is the same way. With 2003 I could at least find what I needed amidst the wizards and side panels. With 2007 I look like an idiot to the people I'm trying to help because of the ribbon toolbars and things moved from the old menus into the right-click menus.

Ok I guess it's a preference. And 90%.. ok probably but how 'bout just us?

I knew friends that love simpler interface but I also knew youngsters that love newer interface. Any idea why?

And probably, most people who know much about the technical parts of windows must have at least tasted the MSDOS era. You wouldn't say you also have tried DOSShell would you? Just kidding. I also tried so it doesn't mean that it does apply.

Anyway before Win2k and XP was released I just preferred playing around DOS instead and not Win don't know why. Btw isn't Win2k a bit slower than XP?

I knew in the time when Vista was still Longhorn that it won't go better than XP and so I never really touched it unless someone requires me to. I don't know with Windows 7. Has it also became twisted like VISTA? I thought it was based from XP.. speed of XP with the outer shell of Vista. Maybe it still was not simplified.

I agree. O*2007 is just too baby-sitting. You can no longer use speedy shortcuts like the ones you can use in 2003.

I know around 10 people that have tried to install Windows 7 over XP thinking that newer means better, only to start complaining. Piracy here is still around 50%-60% in companies (now mostly small and smaller) and around 95% in homes. Other 5% are mostly brought from other countries. So people feel free to experiment.

Windows 7 IS better then Vista, but it still needs minimum ~800MB of RAM to run without any resident programs. XP Home can make it with 128MB, and XP Pro with 256MB. These numbers are only for comparison. Not to mention Powerful Graphics card and plenty of CPU power for W7. Most new PC's sold here have 1GB, and some 2GB, with integrated graphics and cheapest CPU's so objective speed difference old those PC's is staggering. Not to mention ancient PC's with 256 or 512MB of RAM.

When you add mandatory AV protection, I have chosen Kaspersky Internet Security as the safest, speed of PC is decreased even more.

That may be true in some cases, but I have found Windows 7 to be dramatically faster on the same machine than XP was. The upgrade for me was a huge improvement in speed (and a good sized boost in framerate in my windows centric games).

I think the younger generation likes flashy colors, special effects and gadgets that serve no useful purpose. Then they wonder why their apps run slow because they don't realize those effects and gadgets use memory.

From one of my posts about a week ago:
"I started learning computers with a Commodore64 and later DOS5+Deskmate on a 12MHz Tandy 286. I kept my DOS-based machines running fast and efficient for many years by monitoring the AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS files and keeping them optimized."

I tell all my friends "I miss DOS". DOS 6.22 booted in seconds on my 486DX100 with 16MB RAM and it "just worked". I remember using DOSShell, QEMM, Desqview, Quikmenu3, TruSpace, THE Draw and LEWP. In Win3.11 I used Norton Utilities with its shell and Slideshow for screensaver/wallpaper management. In fact, I've recreated it all as much as possible with Virtualbox, and to some extent in DOSBox. In DOSBox I've added GEM plus it's addons.

I'll remain skeptic about Vista/7's claims of speed. Unless I'm mistaken, as long as Window$ needs the registry all versions of Window$ will be prone to the "windows rot" phenomenon.