Too many or too few desktop UIs
We had Register articles recently complaining (completely incorrectly) that Linux desktops were all like Windows 95.
Now we have someone saying all desktops should look like Windows 95.
Linux desktops are flexible enough that you can make them look very like Windows 95 if you want to.
And a Windows XP look for KDE
OK, an UI is about more than a look, but the start menu is an important element, as is the taskbar. You can make the behaviour of the desktop more like Windows 95, and use apps consistent with that too.
No one does that. I do not think it is what users necessarily want. Different users want different things. I do not want a Windows 95 like UI, and my desktop does not look anything like it. Some of the changes are for functionality Windows 95 did not have (e.g. switching KDE activities and virtual desktops).
There is also a marketing problem - for example if MS never changed their UI it would look bad when compared to something more modern. If Linux or MacOS had a desktop that looked like Windows 95 the reaction of most people would be that they were obviously years behind Microsoft.
The average user (whether an individual buying for themselves, or management in a business) has no clue about improvements under the hood and will buy on the basis of visible features and bling.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
