Does it seem to anyone else that there are two divergent strands regarding the s2?
One strand focuses on IQ - lens and sensor integration, optical performance, etc. It is likely the s2 will excel at this, as its Leica's strength for years.
A second strand of interests focuses on the larger picture and the overall system integration of the camera with its files to a larger set of issues that are part of a contemporary pro's life. Software flexibility and integration, file compatibility, tethering, debugging, rental availability, and service are all part of this second set of issues. Obviously, with digital work some of theseare more critical than in the days of film. But are all of them equally important? Not necessarily.
Can a pro accept a camera that excels in IQ but not necessarily in the second set? Is there a minimum acceptable performance level for the second criteria, which all serious cameras must meet? Then we could recognize that some are better than others in that way - and some companies, especially really big ones, are going to do better than smaller ones?
A pro's threshold in each of these categories may be different than the serious amateur. A pro might accept slightly less IQ performance, as they search for better systems performance. An amateur, however discerning, may well be willing to give up some things (rentability, service, or even tethering) in search of portability and IQ. Different pros may have different sets of priorities as well.
The idea here is to encourage more definition and separation of these issues, and perhaps reduce the carping and clutter that comes with it.