Noooooooooooooooope. People are looking too far past what the ski is and does. It's actually quite simple, but people are literally getting so wrapped up in the buzzwords that they are confused by the percieved differences.
Once you understand how a 2 dimensional surface interacts with stiffness, camber, length and such, the transition to thinking about function in a 3D environment i.e. deep pow in the context of width, rocker and camber profiles and sidecut is a no brainer IMO. Sure, there are a myriad of choices and that can make it tough to decide, but I think it's more that most people don't understand what experience they're after so they make the wrong choice.
What I mean by that is a traditional-style skier that came from skinnies may very well be very disconcerted by the loose, playful floaty feel of a set of R/R boards whereas they might love something with a huge shovel, real sidecut and a fat tail, since it will be more in line with their expectations, both in terms of physical input and posture as well as turn shape and stability at speed. The same can be said for different shapes. If you want swively, poppy pow performance for trees a 5 point design might be more up your alley, whereas if you want to lay down huge arcs on steep faces, it might not be as good of a choice for your style of play.
So basically I feel like people shoudn't worry about the marketing terms and what's different about that specific brand over another- just try to understand what the different dimensions of construction do in a more broad sense, be honest with yourself about how you ski- or want to- and find the best combination ofthose qualities, no matter what the marketing weirdos are calling it this week.