If I might pitch in, I'd have to say that the OP (who happens to be my DM) makes a lot of points that I agree with, but doesn't seem to make the points that are at the top of my head as I burrow into 4E... or if he does make them, they seem to have missed most of the responders to the thread.
I hadn't even made it halfway through my first trip into the 4E PHB before I heard a quote from The Incredibles in the back of my mind - "When everyone is super... no one will be."
This version of D&D feels like it's out to achieve that end, I fear. It's taking away things that maybe too many players have already given up, and so they don't notice. But the character whose shining moment in a session is a well-delivered one liner instead of a timely critical hit or perfectly orchistrated use of a daily power is just as important in my fantasy genre as those other guys are, and it seems like 4E's kicked him to the curb.
One or more people have asked what mechanics 3.x had to make social or policital encounters better than 4th, and my jaw gapes. You must be joking, right? How about the most maligned class by the power-gamers, the virtually unlamented absence from 4E - the Bard? A class that wasn't so combat useful and so was derided and ignored by hundreds of action-junkie players because he was designed to shine in social and political encounters ?!? And that's just for starters.
There's no doubt that 4E is an incredible game, and if you think I'm just here to bash it then you've probably already stopped reading. Too bad, because you'll miss me admitting that I love the things that 4E has accomplished in the areas it focused on. When we tried our obligatory one shot "test session" for the new edition, I was probably the most vocal doubter about where the game seemed to be going. And yet, when we started playing, I took my halfling Paladin straight over the top and not only had a blast but led the charge to get everyone else at the table to immerse themselves in the fantasy instead of the new game mechanics. And it was oh, so FUN!
But the problem is that this flavor of fun is NOT the end all and be all of fantasy role-playing, not to me. And I think that I have the gift of allowing everyone else at the table with me to enjoy all the other flavors that I like to experiment with, as well. So when I look down the barrel of a game system that's going to change my RPG from 31 flavors to vanilla, strawberry and chocolate, I'm a little bit unhappy. Doesn't mean I don't like those flavors, it just means that I'm not going to pretend that Mocha Chocolate Chip and Banana Mallow Delight aren't worth having anymore, either.
My club-footed dwarven sorcerer with the Scarlet Adder familiar that lived in his beard would never have been played if we had been playing 4E. Neither will my ideas for characters like a wizard who can only cast one spell but believes he can still become a mighty Magus by mastering that spell like no one's business, a cleric who devoutly worships the (possibly imaginary) Goddess of Forgetfulness and strives to strengthen her worship in the world by earning a reputation as a hero, or a runaway gnome who joins a party of adventurers in the hopes of convincing them to escort him on a journey around the world, since all he knows how to do well is build and fix agricultural equipment. They may not be characters you would want to see in your games... but then again, maybe if you'd played a few games with me and my DM you'd find yourself looking forward to them, too.
When you come down to it, I guess that whether character or player, people are mostly the results of their experiences. So I can't say if my opinion is going to have any significance to anyone else out there... but 4E is going to have to become a little less straight and narrow before it can accomodate the type of fantasy that I'm used to.