I don't think we as forum readers can really make any but the most coarse judgements or comparisons on the basis of uploaded pictures. There are too many variables at work, starting with the nature of the ambient light where the photo is taken, the PW light level, the camera's sensitivity/color accuracy, automatic or manual adjustments made in camera or by photo editor software, jpeg compression artifacts, display calibration, ambient light interacting with the display, and finally the reader's color perception or lack thereof. For example where some report a 'big green patch' in the photo above, I'm seeing 'neutral grey' area with a pink halo. Maybe on some other display, with different ambient light, it would look green. Someone sitting next to me could have a different perception entirely. (I had to stop myself loading it into Photoshop to measure the RGB value, there lies madness.)
For some reason, the PW display seems to trigger all sorts of subtle color perception for me. The more conventional computer displays I work with every day are all over the place in terms of being properly calibrated and vary greatly in pixel density, quality, vibrance, brightness, contrast, color gamut etc. Yet this doesn't bother me in the least as I move from one to the other. My first PW drove me a little nuts, though. It would look fantastic in one situation and horribly flawed in another. My replacement is more consistently good, but by no means above my threshold of 'perfection'.