Biker395 

I agree ... mostly. I was referring more to the design where both the front and back derailleur choice is made for the user.

I say "mostly" because there are things you can do with a manual transmission that cannot be done with an automatic (and of course, vice versa). Push starting, for example. I've driven paddle actuated transmissions and they honestly don't appeal to me. Most would consider the automatic xmission superior ... especially the new ones. They're actually capable of better gasoline mileage, particularly the CVT transmissions (likely coming in all cars to meet CAFE requirements), and don't require clutch replacement for the life of the car.

I guess the point really was that just because something is new or uses new technology, doesn't mean it's better. And even if it's better for most, it doesn't mean it's better for everyone. The touch screen interface on new cars is a good example. It's common because it's a cheap way to implement a lot of features, and design changes during development are easier ... not because the end product is better. In a lot of important respects (to me, ergonomics, which are a safety issue), it's worse.

Back on point, electromechanical shifting is a "meh" to me. I don't oppose it ... I just see it as a complex answer to a question that wasn't asked. Changing out cables and fiddling with barrel adjusters now and again has never troubled me. Then again, I know people for whom indexed shifting was a game-changer, so what do I know? lol

Kinda funny I'd find myself with these kind of opinions ... new technology is my business. You'd think I'd be more of a proponent of technology or technology's sake.