Erg. You like the old proficiency system better than the d20 system. I don't think we can ever come to an agreement.
d20 hardly emphasizes power gaming more than 2e. If anything, it improves on it. proficiencies took up all of what, 5 pages? While I liked the individual weapon proficiency system better than the grouped feat approach, the really de-emphasized skills. If you can solve things much easier and faster by hitting it with a rock than using skill, they haven't provided enough support for non-combat skills, and nearly universally that was the case (which was ok when I was 15, but now that I'm not). I think that characters should have non-combat skills commensurate to their fighting skills, at least. And just like you make combat harder when the characters are tougher, you make skill checks harder. Tracking through a rushing river, sneaking past guard dogs with enhanced hearing and some motion sensors, etc.
Yeah, there's power creep in the supplements. Yeah, a lot of it. And yes, a lot of the prestige classes are sucky. But then, a lot of those prestige classes are heavily dependent on setting, so even if you allow most things they find in books, you'll find a lot of it doesn't fit in to what you've done, so you have a VERY easy way out of allowing those classes (as if you couldn't just say "no" anyway).
And I'll agree with 42, blurring the lines is good. Which is why I want to make advancement even more modular, so you can mix them up even better. New multi-classing is one of the first things that won me over (along with an actual pattern to the rules, instead of an arbitrary new idea for each new thing -- they all fit together now). And yes, the new handling of feats and skills sealed the pact.