Agreed. All change is bad. Period. No good can ever come out of change. If things aren't the way I recognize them and like them, then they are obviously inferi

Agreed. All change is bad. Period. No good can ever come out of change. If things aren't the way I recognize them and like them, then they are obviously inferior because as we all know, functional UI design never changes. The principles that we had when Windows XP came out should still be in use because that's what I'm familiar with. And I completely agree with you about using the a computer as a tool not a toy. If I can't immediately change the tool in a way that is familiar to me, it is worthless to me. For instance, the first thing I do when I get a hammer is take it apart and see what kind of different colors I can make the handle. That's how I know it's a good and usable tool. And I've found that the most customizable tools are usually the most usable tools. If I can't choose the font face used on my screwdrivers, I don't even bother. I think we got two different things out of the article. It seems like you got the impression that it was saying that changing things shouldn't happen. I got the point that change for the sake of change is stupid. But if you identify behaviors that people do and don't do, and you change your product accordingly (like Chrome has done) then it's probably a good case for change.