Actually I'm a web designer and this type of camera does many things for my specific needs:
1. On a personal basis; if the prints are good then I'm a happy person.
2. I will be downsizing the photos for web work anyway, and have found with the examples that this works VERY well and produces great results (even the forest/flower picture mentioned earlier).
The only caveat is the lack of finite detail in the hair of the market vendor. This makes it seem more muddied than it should. But considering that I would need to spend the same amount of money for the BODY only version of a DSLR and then pay at least the same amount again for a comparable lense, I see a real value here.
To pay twice as much to get 25% better rendering makes no sense.
However, the real competition I see is the $250.00 more expensive (list) camera from Sony (Sony DSC-R1). Here you have a better lense/photo combination because of the larger sensor, but a less usable zoom range (5X vs. 12X). It depends on what level of quality you need vs. the zoom magnification.
Just my two cents....
Jonathan