I dunno. I've read the subsequent DPAF patents, and there isn't anything remotely revolutionary in there. Mostly just using different sized photodiodes for the AF part, and a means of increasing sensitivity for AF without reducing IQ. If that's all Canon's got for the 7D II, they are going to take a HUGE reputation hit...and they HAVE to know that... (If they don't, then they've totally lost touch with their customer base, and I am seriously hoping that's not the case.)
Are you suggesting that the people here are representative of Canon's customer base? I see lots of clamoring for better IQ on forums but until the 70D, the 7D remained a strong seller. I'd bet a 7DII with 41ish AF points and 10 fps, and a 24 MP DPAF sensor similar in IQ to the 70D, would sell quite well.
It may sell, but I think it would still hurt Canon's reputation. To date, they actually have a very good track record of listening to their customers and delivering on their customers demands. Both the 1D X and 5D III are excellent examples of that...Canon pretty much NAILED both on the head, delivering exactly what their customers wanted.
I agree, jrista.
Maybe the 7DII with 41ish AF points and 10 fps, and a 24 MP DPAF sensor similar in IQ to the 70D, would sell quite well but I wouldn't buy it. Nothing in that list (except maybe the 41 AF points) is "must have" IMO and I'd be really disappointed if my 2009 7D is really the best Canon can do for higher ISO in a crop. And, I don't see the attraction of the DPAF at all. I only use live view if I've got a relatively stationary subject and that's to zoom in and use manual focus in a situation where there is a lot of brush to confuse the AF.
I'll bet I've used live view auto focus in less than 1% of my photos.