Is Skinning destroying the world?

Rubbish. A Mac user complaining about the lack of conformity. What a joke.

I'm the unic user of my computer at home, and a unic Mac user in a Windows intranet at work. At work there's no problem, due to different nature of OSes. At work, with only a instance of skinned programs, there's nop.
When i use Object Bar and Window Blinds, the computer runs so slowly; with desktopx runs very well (with a Pentium 1gh 500 mb ram); before, with a older pentium and "only" 128 Mb, desktopx runs very slowly.
Sincerelly, i think that desktopx really enhances the comunication, the workflow and the speed with the computer.
ObjectBar is a enhancement to the workflow.
Window Blinds is not very useful. The shortcuts to folders or program-controls can be allowed in objectBar or the original Windows taskbar; also, WB not skin all Windows aspects, and sometimes crash the programs (when this happens, the most of the skins make the visiblity of program very poor -just the contrary of first WB intention). Also, sometimes, WBB auto-increases the use om system resources at limit. I dont't like StyleXP (the competence) but is more efficient than WindowBlinds if yoy have lots of memory (WARNING: this program also crashes!).
Other kind of programs: WindowFX make crash some programs; Winamp have a little different usage, but never crashes and are very useful; Sonique is the best skin implemented but are too much complicated; EZPOP works very well!
THE DIFFERENCE: I use Kaleidoscope on Mac (the analogue of WB on Mac). MacOS 9 (the Mac users oficial release until Photoshop 6.5 comes) is more delicate in memory usage, and crashes the computer on any memory deviation. This occurs any day at least 3-4 times. My Mac never crashed using Kaleidoscope. Also, this program really skin all Mac's interface aspects.
Other Mac Apps. (Sound Jam, Quicktime-iTunes-Sherlock and other carbon skinned, never crashed, never, never.
This is not a charge to WindowBlinds. Simply i find desktopx enhances more the desktop and the use with the computers. If WB comes more robust, i will use WB surelly.

funny that anyone would complain about things like skinning while the interface most people deal with the most is the web which is incredibly inconsistent.

yes

this must be a bad joke

You should see the forum replies. In fact, go to http://www.osopinion.com/cgi-bin/w3t4/showthreaded.pl?Cat=&Board=talkbackforum&Number=26968&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5#Post26968 and have a look.

I guess McNeill decided to celebrate April Fools Day a little early.

Sure, OSs should be designed with consistency in mind. I won't argue that. But whether or not those standards are followed should be left up to the consumer.

Poorly researched, poorly written, and smacks of someone who's afraid of customization and would rather do away with it than deal with it. Jumping into an "experts agree" paragraph right after your introduction shows just how desperate you are to make even the tiniest point. "Lookit, Jef Raskin agrees with ME! Obviously, I'm right, for what the hell do you lowly peons know about what's best for you?"

A 6th-grade debate team member could rip holes into that article faster than it took McNeill to write it.

LMAO... The comments are hilarious.

Evidently she has become one with the Mircosoft(tm) Borg(tm)