This is something that really pisses me off about software designers. If it's not broke, don't fix it. Seriously. What was wrong with Sitemeter's previous interface? True, it wasn't beautiful, but it was simple and really easy to use, fast, and graphically un-intensive. That meant it got the job done without having to be flashy. I want a system that works fast. I don't have time to dilly daddle while trying to figure out how many people have visited my site. I've got other things to do, like writing blog posts, or writing in general, or reading. The new Firefox (3.0 I think) did the same thing, making the interface look new and beautiful. The problem? It ran like crap. So I downgraded and I won't upgrade ever again. And if they force me to upgrade, I'll go elsewhere for my browsing needs. There's absolutely no reason to change an already functional interface. None. And if you're going to change that interface, you should at least offer a "classic" view or skin or something so that people who don't really give a crap about visual beauty in their software don't have to deal with it. The good thing about Windows Vista is that it upgrade its interface, but allows you to go to a classic interface. I've left my Vista the way it is, because it doesn't run slow for me, but XP had the same thing and it did run slow, so I used the classic interface.
The way I see it, software designers need to realize that people who like their products probably don't care if you try to make it look prettier. A lot of us really don't care. We're happy with the product as it is. If you need to upgrade, do so without fiddling with the way it looks. There's really no reason to upgrade the visual layout if all it's going to do is slow things down.
(Don't click the read more, there isn't any more after this!)