I really don't see all the hassle regarding GPS. I think it's useless. GPS is useful in cars and mobile phones if you're lost, but geo-tagging? Couldn't care less and certainly will not be a deal maker or breaker.
It is for me. I like to know where pictures were taken. That might be practical if I shot a couple of dozen pictures per day. When I go on a two week vacation, though, I average 2-3,000 shots—on the order of a couple of hundred shots per day. Without geotagging, it is completely infeasible to figure out where each shot was taken with much more precision than "Somewhere in [insert city here]." With geotagging like I have on my iPhone, I just load the pictures into Lightroom, click the Map tab, and I can see where the photo was taken to within a few feet.
I've been waiting six years for Canon to release a crop body with GPS. I guess I can wait another year. I was just hoping to actually have GPS for the photos I'm going to take in September. At this point, given that they've already shipped the 6D with GPS, I can't imagine even contemplating buying a camera without GPS knowing that there's about a 90% chance that they left it off the 70D because they plan to save that "advanced feature" for the next 7D.
So I'll continue waiting. Again.
While I understand the convenience of a built in GPS, personally I wouldn't let that be a deal breaker compared to all of the other amazing features the camera seems to offer; you have options at least. The GPS accessory, or an external 3rd party GPS that you leave in your bag and sync up later in Lightroom. Yes, it would be great if that extra step wasn't needed, but I doubt you'll see GPS in a 7DmkII - if Canon wants to maintain the ruggedness and weather sealing of the original 7D, I doubt you'll see GPS or wifi given the need for the top plastic plate....
That said, obviously if you feel the camera won't suit your needs, I hope something comes along soon that does