Well, I don't see it. So there you go.
But I don't think creative decisions and production techniques that were the best they could do at the time necessarily show something as having "aged badly". The idea that a tv show could have accurately predicted how the year 1999 would look is just silly. What it doesn't do is look like 1974 - it's a great projection 25 years ahead.
I don't think 2001 is an unfair comparison, as Space: 1999 was probably trying to emulate its look. The effects are definitely comparable. And the acting is way better.
I think the effects in Space are the best I've ever seen in any tv show. They've got a depth and solidity that seems more real to me than all your flashy CGI stuff. Maybe it's just what I want to see. The design and the effects aren't there to be a documentary portrayal of the future - they're there to serve the story, and they do that fantastically.