Originally Posted by
Six jours
I tend to get caught in the "faster vs. better" trap: I personally think STI is "better" in the sense that it's more convenient for most cyclists. But I also don't personally think it makes most cyclists "faster", except under certain specific circumstances. I'd say the same for 10 speed vs. 9 or 8 speed, clipless vs. clips and straps, and a number of other things. Heck, I use wood rims on a regular basis and they work as well as anything else - and are lighter than most, including just about any of the aero rims that are all the rage these days.
Short version: A good argument can be had about whether something is faster, lighter, stronger, more reliable - but "better" is so subjective that a debate about it can't be much more than the trading of opinions. (And mine are the only opinions which are correct, BTW.)
Your opinion is obviously correct, because it agrees with mine!
But what you say is the xact point I've often tried to make to other cyclists; a point which they either can't grasp- or refuse to. The differences which make something "better" in cycling, are often so small and subtle; and have so little an impact on actual performance, that it's ridiculous to argue about such thing; better just to admit that it's more about aesthetics and perception.