Now the biggest issue of all: Am I the only one it has occurred to that textured surfaces make time stand still, and are therefore most appropriate in still scenes such as dioramas or museum displays and photographs? Isn't it a bit like mixing metaphors when you have a layout full of moving trains but all the water is caught, like in sci-fi books' proverbial stasis boxes where time stands still and contents are preserved infinitely, in a frozen moment? Flat, still EnviroTex does not vary one iota from moving time, whereas textured water surfaces most assuredly can depict only frozen time. Plenty of ponds, lakes, and slow-moving streams have their clear-as-glass modes, and are especially attractive at these times.
I believe it is time to validate all the flat-water modelers, especially those who ever felt their work was unfinished or inadequate; perhaps they were unknowingly merely following the dictates of a type of aesthetic integrity, a sixth sense of harmony about consistency relative to Einstein's fourth dimension (time). At the event horizons of black holes time can theoretically stand still, and near-light-speed traveling can create paradoxes of relativity where one entity's time is nearly stopped relative to another, but there is nothing intrinsic to the sub-light-speed world of model railroading that suggests any need for time-flow differences.
The dilemma, since flat, still, moving-time-watered layouts lacking surface features are as appealing in their own way as textured-surface, frozen-time layouts, then becomes: which method of time modeling should be selected? Or should the two be mixed? This dilemma will be solved, individually, by each hobbyist. But I believe that since it has—as far as I know—not been overtly stated previous to this time, it is now time to declare that either mode of water modeling on layouts has equal merit.
My own plans are for some of each.