[Redbeard67]

I don't think this review was very informed.

Point: horrendous number of powers are extra work for the DM.
"For the love of God" compare the number of powers in 4th to the number of spells in 3.5 alone - never mind how many feats. Remember that characters have access to only a limited number of powers at a time - and I think you'll see that 4th does not have an overwhelming level of detail for the DM.

Point: focus on combat to the exclusion of other modes of the game
As others have said, this has always been true of D&D, and some groups have had combat only games and other groups can play whole sessions without a die being rolled. This is not new.
4th edition does however, have an explicit system of awarding XP for non-combat situations and conflicts - much more than 3.5's "give EXP awards for quests." 4th has guidelines for how difficult the challenges are, and equates those noncombat challenges explicitly into EXP. In fact, 6 of the 7 examples in the Skill Challenges section are... non-combat.
While it is true that rules for adjudicating combat comprise the vast majority of the book... a lot of role playing does not cry out for hard and fast die rolling for success and failure. Previous editions of DnD had no rules for noncombat situations.
Combat is balanced to the extreme - so that some characters aren't left out of the process.
Does roleplaying need that attention to detail and balance in order to keep people involved? Could detailed rules correct the situation? There are guidelines and advice for the DM to keep different players involved and motivated in the story.

Minor Quibbling detail:
When some flavor of previous incarnations is preserved (wizards being able to use different spells/powers from choices in their spell book) the review complains, while at the same time complaining how different this version is from older ones.

Minor Quibbling Detail:
The 30th level dofus that can inexplicably do things better without training that a trained 1st level character can... well by the convention of the game, when you're 30th level you're a candidate for god hood.

Something Reviews Have Left Out that I think is awesome:
4th has a nice little system for aiding the DM when the player wants to do something without the rules. Before when someone wanted to go all Errol Flynn in the game, the DM had to completely wing it. Having the player roll a d20 against a number the DM pulled out of his or her ass wasn't a big deal - but then what was the effect? etc.
On page 42 (that has to be an in-joke by the designers... 42 is the answer to the any question) there's a nifty chart and guidelines for varying difficulty, damage, level, etc and plenty of verbage to encourage DMs to not say "no" to players doing off the wall things. I don't think we've had that kind of encouragement for free form play since Gygax was writing (and even he had his proclivity for different charts for everything.)
Anyway - DnD now has some solid advice for stunts. I think that's one of the cooler new details that I've not seen reviewers mention.

Minor Quibbling Detail:
Comparing the abilities of a 4th edition wizard and a previous edition.
No, the 4th edition wizard can't use a wand of fireballs all day. He can however, use an at will Area spell (Cloud of Daggers, Scorching Burst, Thunderwave) all day long. He'll still blast away a lot of orcs. Is this so different?

Minor quibbling detail:
You get additional uses of magic items when you pass milestones (about every other encounter.) This gamist rule is part of both balancing between players as well as making the focus of that part of the game being character ability rather than their toy chest.

Yes, a lot of sacred cows are cooked. But in some ways, the return to class being the defining feature of the character is a return to earlier incarnations. 3.5 became all about complicated paths between all too many classes and prestige classes.

Ok - a long rant. I know that the reviewer has some enthusiasm for the changes and this this isn't a wholly negative review. I should still thank the reviewer for taking the time and care that he did. But you should look a little deeper before passing judgment, and certainly before running it.