Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike

You (and at least one other poster) are stirring up controversy by pontificating on a subject of which you have little/no knowledge or experience, and only based on what you "heard" or have chosen to hear.
I will shed some more light on the subject for you. Most of the commuting bicyclists I saw commuting in The Netherlands from 1986 -2002 were cycling on the "performance depraved" bicycles as portrayed in http://www.gazelle.nl/nl/productcate...=2&idSegment=1
And not the more upscale ones offered on the other pages of the Gazelle website.
Note that Gazelle is a provider of high end commuting bicycles and there are many other providers, usually at lower prices, but most bicycles actually seen on the streets look very much like the basic Stad Cycles offered by Gazelle. Yes, they are heavy (by American "performance" standards). But the Dutch have figured out that cycling without significant hills reduces the need to worship the gear count and weight shaving tricks of the "performance enhanced" commuter. These are most definitely practical bikes for commuting any credible distance in comfort with reliability and minimal maintenance or tinkering.

Apparently there is at least one "practical commuter" in a flat place like Chicago who can't figure that out.