Ignoring the cameras I use that only have primes available, I do tend to use primes a lot more than zooms. I've been using Nikons for 40 years, and during that time I have owned and sold the old 35-70 f/3.3-4.5 Nikkor and the Angenieux 28-70 f/2.6. Currently I have the 17-35 f/2.8 and a Nikon-converted Leica 35-70 f/4. That's all. Apart from the little Leica 35-70 which I carry when travelling with the D3 I hardly ever use zooms. I quite like the old Leica Tri-Elmar 28-35-50 f/4, which isn't a true zoom.
For Nikon primes I have the three PC-E lenses (24, 45 and 85 - invaluable for their purpose), 16 mm fisheye, 20 mm, three 28 mm including the Schneider PC Super Angulon, the old 35 mm f/1.4, a bunch of 50s, the 60 mm AF-D Micro, three 85s (PC-E, the f/1.4 AF-D; old Nikkor-H f/1.8; new f/1.8G on order) two 105s (the old AI-S f/2.5 and the DC f/2) and the 200 mm f/4 AF-D Micro. I sold my Angenieux 180 mm f/2.3 because I hardly ever used it and the value had risen threefold since I bought it.
I tend to use primes for most of my personal work because I see each series of pictures as having a particular perspective, so primes make me happy. Having different qualities of lenses available is also good - that's why I have the old classic 85 and 105 lenses - they are cheap and have their own pleasing character. The overriding thing might be that for the vast majority of the photography I've done, primes were the only option so I've always been used to them.