There was a higher level of respect for Sabbath in 2000, but his solo stuff was probably more recognizable to the general public. From my perspective, based on people I knew, both Ozzy and Sabbath were still quite popular in the early 2000s. More people would recognize Ozzy’s hits so in that sense he was more popular, but Sabbath influence alot of grunge, ect, and it was stoner music too, so it appealed to people who didn’t like his poppier solo stuff. Sabbath was more popular with people who knew more about music and had a broader knowledge of it than solo Ozzy was.

Undercover was the last album that attracted any attention. It didn’t attract very much, and it was BAD attention. After a weak regular album and an album of shit covers that people only acknowledged to mock, it was over for him as a “current artist.”

Do you really not remember Perry Mason, from Ozzmosis? At the time it seemed like a big album to me, but I’m not surprised that it hasn’t stuck around. You still hear alot of glossy, poppy classic rock, which would describe Ozzy right up until that point, but that was a slower, very mid-90s album. It’s alot easier to tell where that album.

Listening to No More Tears now, alot of the songs don’t stand out, but I have to give Zack Wylde credit for straddling the lines between what was becoming modern metal at the time, 80s pop metal that was going out of style, and some more traditional classic rock elements. People might have slagged it for being cartoony, and it wasn’t a great album, but he did a good job filling more than one niche and breathing 10 more years of life into Ozzy’s image.
No, I don’t think the reality show made his music more popular.

I listened to Undercover once and laughed at it. I don’t think that I heard any of his later albums all the way through.