Originally Posted By: Pat Marr
The point I was trying to make is that when products of equal ability compete, the one that looks best wins. But if you bring something to the table that the competition simply doesn't have.. then looks become secondary.

Pat, I wish that was true but the world is full of mediocre products and services that win because of pretty packaging. Millions of people buy bottled water that comes from the same city water supply as their tap water because of the story they have been told. People line up for hours or days to get the Apple watch that is no better at telling time than a cheap Casio at Walmart (and these same folks already have every internet device available so it isn't like they need the Apple watch to get online).

But this issue goes MUCH deeper than just looks. Improved GUI makes a software product easier to use and more fun to use and it makes you more productive. Because you already know how to work around BIAB's warts you see it as bringing so much more to the table than the competition but I am sure lots of people (especially younger people) place a higher value on the usability/productivity side of the equation and when you seriously consider those factors, even though a product excels in one area, having such detriments in another kinda balances the whole thing out. And in that scenario lots of folks are gonna choose modern over Windows 3.1.

And one last thought...I know we are told not to judge a book by its cover but in a world where we are inundated with choices and options, great products that are ugly and not nearly up to current GUI standards are gonna simply get passed over by many/most people. Their loss? Yeah, but PG's and ultimately ours too!