For those of us who learned software development back in the '80s and '90s, I actually like the old-school look. That's why I build databases the way I do. I prefer overlapping windows instead of the tabbed document interface that Access defaults to. I like forms that are clean, simple, and utilitarian. They're designed to get the job done efficiently, not necessarily to win a graphic design award.

It's the same philosophy I have with my website. Every now and then someone tells me it looks like it's from 2003. My response is usually, "Yep, and you can find exactly what you're looking for in about 10 seconds." I'd much rather have a site that's easy to navigate than one full of giant hero images, animations, and other artsy-fartsy design trends that just get in the way.

Now, if your goal is to impress clients or executives, there's certainly nothing wrong with spending extra time on the visual design. I've done a couple of videos on form aesthetics and making Access applications look more polished. There are plenty of little tricks you can use without sacrificing usability.

That said, when someone says, "Your database looks old," I'd ask them exactly what they mean. That's like telling your mechanic, "My car doesn't sound right." OK... what sound? A squeak? A rattle? A grinding noise?

It's the same thing I run into all the time with my students. Someone will email me and say, "I followed your video and it doesn't work." OK... what doesn't work? Are you getting an error message? If so, what exactly does it say? Did you get different results than I did? Does the button do nothing? Did your computer burst into flames? "It doesn't work" isn't enough information for me to diagnose the problem. Likewise, saying a database "looks old" doesn't really tell you what needs to be improved. Ask them to be specific. The more details they can give you, the easier it is to decide what, if anything, should be changed.

Likewise, what about the database looks old? Is it the colors? The fonts? The buttons? The layout? The icons? Or are they really saying the user experience feels dated? The more specific they can be, the easier it is to decide whether it's worth changing.

For me, function has always come before form. If a database is fast, intuitive, and helps people get their work done efficiently, then it's doing its job. Looking modern is nice, but usability is what keeps people happy.

My first instinct would be to say thank-you, for the reasons Richard outlines above.  

People say the same thing about Craigslist.  To me, Craigslist is one of the best designed websites you can find because it does the one thing it is supposed to do better and faster than "new" websites.  Maybe I just feel that way because I am old too.  :)

In my mind, it's like having a 15 year-old tell someone that their 1966 Shelby Cobra looks old.  They really don't understand what they are looking at, beyond the surface level.  They are just comparing it's color and shininess to the Camrys they see on the road.  If they did know, they would be asking how it is built and how it performs.  They would also know that changing the aesthetics is just cosmetic and can be done any time.

I wouldn't worry about it.  I would focus on intuitiveness, simplicity, and clarity.  That will make it easier to use.

Matt you are correct, sir.

Just to add something to that: that's like when young kids nowadays listen to Rush, and they're like, "That's old people's music." I tell them, "You are out of your damn mind. That is the best music ever made." Today's music is all electronic garbage, which I'm not against. Electronic music, don't get me wrong. I love synthesizers just as much as anybody else, but when you put a drum track and a bass pattern on repeat and that's the whole song, that's not music. Don't get me started. Then again, I did hear Metallica in an elevator the other day.

Can you share a screenshot or 2 so we can see?