Let me have the honor to start...

The camera seems like a well rounded package, but there are several key points where it fails to be competitive:

11 AF points, 5 fps, 12MP and 720P are all sub-par compared to similarly-priced Canon 7D launched last year - 19 points, 8 fps, 18MP and 1080P. The Nikon D300s is also ahead with 51 points and 7 fps (same resolution as the Oly though)
These specs are also way below some entry level cameras (e.g. Sony A55 has 16MP and 10 fps and costs less than half, their A33 with 14MP and 7 fps costs even less)
No AF assist lamp. They had one in the E-1, why resort to the annoying built-in flash? Even some entry level cameras have this useful feature nowadays.
Doesn't use the excellent GH1 sensor. Did Panasonic refuse to provide it? If not, then I really can't understand why Olympus chose the mediocre PEN sensor.
Same heavily criticized ergonomics of the E-3. They had a good thing going with the E-30, why not continue from there?
Large and heavy compared to what one would expect from a camera with a relatively small-sensor designed for outdoors use (think the old E-1 and Pentax K-7 for more sensible designs).
No obvious firmware-only improvements (such as allowing the WB sensor to be used as an external color-meter for manual color temperature readings; multi-exposure HDR mode)
Almost no innovation
No ambition.
No real commitment to FourThirds.

With 7 fps, 14-16MP sensor and 1080P movie mode the E-5 could have been a contender, but the way it is the only thing that could save it is a huge price cut (or a 12-60 lens free with every purchase of a body <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='🙁' />)

PS.

Klaus will need to eat some crow for claiming Olympus would never release an upgrade to the E-3. I must admit I was a bit surprised myself though.