well, the general consensus from where I come from is that the only reason the ACU was chosen over a variation of CP Multicam was because the bean-counters (not the brass concerned with soldiers (meaning all bean counters)) liked the fact that it was about $40 less than ANY MultiCam setup, and the Desk-Jockeys (the soldiers who's lives are rarely, if ever, in danger) were fine with it. I, personally believe that that is where the Generals supporting the ACU's get their "Well, every soldier I talk to is perfectly happy with the ACU..."
Does anyone here know of a Brigadier General R. Mark Brown? He just assumed command of the most important Army-direct R&D facility in the USA: Natick Army Lab Soldier Systems Center (I live like 20 minutes from it). He is trying to push a new system through: CP MultiCam. MultiCam was designed for use by big-time professionals: Private Military Contractors. I honestly haven't heard many reviews from any of them on this.
The truth is that in the modern world, camoflauge isn't as helpful as it once was. anyone with a good IR scanner can see your entire company. Yes, Camo does help.
Actually thats what the ACU is based upon. It deters TIS and NVS, and with it's digiltal design it palys with the eye's, if your moving your harder to spot in ACU's. I have spoken to a many (including my father) wabout what he thinks about them his words where "Awesome, it's a great all around utility uniform. No ironing, it is breathable, it blends in somewhat with most enviortments, it's alot more comfortable, plus all the pockets"
The ACU is not just about camoflaging into tree's. It was bulit around being IR/NV resistant, comfortable, easy to maintain, multi-enviorment uniform. And these so call "desk jockies: you speak of, your clueless about. My best friends father was on the R&D for the FCS adn he served in Storm and is right now in Iraq with a Cav unit, so there goes you whole "bean counter" and "desk jocky" theory.