At a minimum it looks like you are getting a 5DIV type sensor in a cheaper and lighter 6DII type body (which now has 1/8000 too). So if you were in the market for a 6DII there are clear benefits from the better sensor (unless Canon stupidly has just upped the pixel count on the 6DII one).
Once the high release price (close to that of the release £2K price for the 6DII) drops to more realistic levels it may become an attractive proposition to those who want a mirrorless 6DII with a better sensor. If however the performance of the R sensor is just the same as that of the 6DII I'd more agree with you.
If you have a collection of L lenses they will work the same on both the old bodies and the new mirrorless body (full performance compatability is claimed by Canon).I'd thus expect and hope the Canon EF mount adaptor to R bodies to work a bit better than say EF to FE ones on a Sony where some lenses have problems. Also there is the No support for lens corrections such as peripheral shading, CA and distortion issue noted by Metabones for their EF to FE adaptor.
See above. I was looking to possibly get a Sony FF for a better sensor and still be able to use my Canon lenses. If the R has the same or better performance than the 5DIV one, that requirement is mostly met. Canon in the past has (sometimes) used better performing sensors in cheaper new models.
Aren't the old lenses still 'natively compatible' with the old Canon bodies (the ones which make up the majority of what Canon sells). Why then would the market value of the lenses drop when they can still be used on a 80D, 7DII, 6DII, 5DIV. 5DSR etc etc. Or for that matter on a Sony A7III/A7RIII...
Doing a quick calculation, to switch systems completely would cost me over £3.5k to replace like for like lenses (and the Sony ones in some cases are worse performing). And that is before the Canon lenses 'plummet' in price 
Well if they did, there would be loads of devalued old EF lenses to select from on the 2nd hand market if your old vs current arguement holds water...
I get that people expect video in cameras these days (it was Canon who popularised DSLR cinematography after all), but if video features are a deal breaker for someone, why are they looking at a stills camera?! I'd like to be able to move a sofa with a Ferrari, but it wouldn't put me off buying one.
3fps at full metering/focusing compares very poorly to other systems. As does the lack of IBIS (related to existing compatibility with IS equipped EF lenses?).
The price of those lenses! It's not far off normal L prices, but odd that for the consumer model they have chosen only one non-L lens. I would have expected a raft of "affordable" lenses to come with this model, and the L lenses to launch with the "pro" camera that's rumored to come later. Instead, half of the lenses they are launching cost more than the camera!! And 1 1/2 KG for the 28-70?! yikes!
Oddly, the Petapixel EOS R article has sample images, one of which has been taken with a lens that hasn't been launched (focal length given as 15mm). Mistake? Or do they have other info?
The lens control ring looks interesting, especially as the RF lenses being enormous will shift the balance of weight further onto your left hand. It's great they are offering an adapter that retro-fits this feature to old glass. The rear filter adapter is also a great use of the space. Shame it's one or the other (control ring, or filter - not both).
I remain skeptical of the touchy slidey button thing though. Will be keen to see how that's used, but my instinct is I would have preferred they kept the rear dial or added a joystick.
Overall, I think there's a chance they might have a well sorted camera in a couple of generations 
I don't know much about dedicated large sensor video cameras but they don't seem to be as widely available or practical as the mirrorless cameras, hence there was a lot of initial interest in Canon DSLRs for video (despite them not being very usable for it).Video is something mirrorless cameras can do well so it's something they can offer as an improvement over a DSLR without compromising them as a stills camera.Panasonic in particular have shown how popular video is on these formats with the GH series so it's clearly something people want.
Furthermore the poor video on the Canon camera isn't a compromise for some other feature, to make a Ferrari move a sofa you'd need to compromise its performance but in this case they could have easily added better video features on the camera without impacting on the rest of it.I assume it's a deliberate choice by Canon to not take sales away from other segments, something they're well known for.
High speed shooting is something else mirrorless can do well so I suspect the low speeds are again a deliberate choice which as you say are weak against similarly priced rivals.I can't see any technical reason why they don't offer IBIS, Sony, Nikon and Panasonic have all offered IBIS in addition to lens based IS.
This is what I don't understand about the camera as I'm not sure what it's meant to be positioned as, the spec on the body looks like it's designed to undercut the A7III and the Nikon Z6 but then the lens line up seems to be super high end.
It is confusing...its a start though, one that’s been a long time coming
Neither Canon or Nikon have knocked it out of the park tbh. Nikon appear to have done a better job than Canon though imo, at least from a spec point of view. Nikon can shoot at 9fps with AEL and without AF tracking, and 5.5fps with tracking and without exposure locked. It has good weather sealing and has IBIS.
Canon has 5fps which drops to 3fps with tracking priority  Also no IBIS, and not sure on the weather sealing. The rear of the Canon looks naff too 
I was thinking the same about Nikon which I was disappointed produced cameras that are incredibly similar to the A7III and the A7RIII but then looking at the Canon, it does highlight how impressive Nikon's efforts are for their first camera to match up reasonably well to Sony's third generation.
DPR have done a summary of the Canon and they seem a little confused about the point of the camera as well acknowledging it's unremarkable and mentioning while the 28-70 F2 is impressive it's unlikely many will use it on this camera.They also raise a good point about the shutter closing when changing lenses:
The Canon EOS R isn't a mirrorless 5D IV, but it's a start
Pretty much every first impression I've seen has complimented this feature and wondering why others haven't done it however DPR mention that the sensor surface is much tougher than the shutter blades.
Probably because of "With the dust only just settling after the recent launch of Nikon's Z7" the sensor needs all the dust protection it can get...
Yeah, the shutter closing when changing lenses seems an obvious thing to me. That being said, how much it actually stops dust I’ve no idea. What I mean is, if dust’s getting into the camera the closed shutter stops dust getting on immediately, but as soon as you fire a couple of shots and said dust is thrown around inside it could easily end up on the sensor anyway.
Dishonest. Misleading. Unnecessary. EOS R and cropped 4K - EOSHD
That article is a load of nonsense, people shouldn't dismiss the 1.8x crop mode as bad because it's just Canon trying something different and it may actually be better.As for the older sensor don't you know developing sensors is hard?You can't expect Canon to just make a new sensor as that takes time and money.I mean sure, Sony and Nikon have developed cutting edge BSI and stacked sensors but you can't compare them because this is just Canon's first attempt so it's only fair to compare it against the original A7.Yes I know it's Nikon's first attempt as well but let's just ignore that for the moment as it's more convenient.
Also don't get hung about the specs because this is the future and it's all about the lenses which conveniently have an undefinable element about them or 'je ne sais quoi' so don't worry about the older sensor because the lenses are so awesome.
I would like to say I'm joking but this is from actual photography sites after a bit of reading around this morning, amusingly some of which were prefaced by saying they weren't official Canon sponsored posts.I can't remember which site it was but they'd written about how different the attitude was between Sony and Canon - the A7 series have kept improving because Sony have been delivering what people have wanted largely whereas the Canon is clearly designed to be deliberately limited as I don't believe the limitations are due to a lack of technical ability in most cases.Clearly though Canon still have a very strong name to the degree I saw a comment claiming that buying a Sony was like buying a Kia whereas Canon/Nikon was like buying Porsche which was a good illustration of how utterly ridiculous some people's brand loyalties are.