"Your money is better spent on an SLR". Is it?

http://digitalcameraguide.blogspot.com/ says:

"If you want a top-of-the-line camera with TONS of features, awesome
lenses, amazing resolution, super-sharp sensors, and no compromises made,
AND if you don't want to learn how to use an SLR... then one of these
super-expensive cameras is for you. But your money WOULD be better spent
on an SLR, which is why the Canon Digital Rebel did sneak into this
guide."


I guess you have to read the whole Web page (or at least the introduction)
to put this quote in its proper context, and indeed the whole page looks
interesting and well written (although I've only skipped through it
myself).

I must confess that I don't agree with the statement, though. Whilst SLRs
do have capabilities that are different to non-SLRs, I don't think that
choosing a lighter, more compact camera that doesn't require an expensive
bag-full of lenses and accessories to make it work to its fullest extent,
is a worse way to spend your money. I would suspect that it takes just as
much effort to learn how to use a top-range non-SLR as it would to learn
how to use an SLR - after all many of the items you need to learn are the
same.

Just my opinion, of course! Thanks, BNM, for the write-up.

Cheers,
David