Well, I'm not about to launch into some philosophical post about the OSR movement. Suffice to say, I feel that the availability of another OSR style game (the original B/X in this case) will only increase the number of people playing old-school style games.
No, I wanted to point out a very beneficial point of Labyrinth Lord over B/X: organisation. It's an argument which is often brought up in relation to clones vs the original editions, but it's actually rather difficult to point that finger at B/X, which is, in my opinion, impeccably laid out, not to mention having a beautiful concision, which obviously aids its readability.
I only came to realise that Labyrinth Lord still has one up on B/X when I gleefully started chopping up the PDFs I'd bought from dndclassics.com. I wonder how many other people tried this too -- what most of us have never dared do with the real books? What I discovered is that, despite the urging to do so in the introduction of the Expert rule book, it's actually not easy to make a decent rearrangement / combination of the two rule books into a cohesive whole. What you end up with is something like this:
- Section 1: Basic
- Section 1: Expert
- Section 2: Basic
- Section 2: Expert
I guess this is why the BECMI Rules Cyclopedia is so popular as well. I'm not really a fan of the CMI parts of BECMI, but I can definitely see the appeal of an all-in-one combined rule book.