The DC100 (Defender Concept) pictured above received enough negative feedback when introduced that LR designers, in subsequent interviews published in the auto press, said that the production model was not going to look anything like it. When every new update/model comes out a certain segment of the fan base dislikes it by default. Remember in 1984 putting coil springs on the 90/110 was considered a step too far.
I am withholding judgment until I see the new Defender in person and drive it. If it can do the same things for which I use my D1 and comes with an Ingenium diesel then I will consider buying one. Most of the people commenting on the new Defender - including those here - will never actually buy one. Or at least not until prices of used models reach cheapfuck territory. Only on rare occasion do I drive my Rover like I'm competing in the Camel Trophy so I don't use most of its capabilities most of the time. When I do, I end up damaging it. So if the new Defender can get me up and down the trails I like to drive, is more reliable than my GEMS and Lucas trucks, is field serviceable, can carry all the crap I bring, and looks halfway decent, then it meets my personal criteria for what I need out of a truck. Everyone is going to have their own criteria based on their needs and wants.
I have so far hesitated to embrace the adoption of newer technology. I like to be able to fix stuff myself. But I think that this can still be done with the newer vehicles to some extent. You need fancier tools and more expensive parts, but you can learn to do it. Having to remove the body for certain jobs to access the engine in the 5.0 RRS? Things like that are ridiculous.