To back up James's concern, Nikon's own press release (attached to the Galbraith preview - which is a PREview because nowhere does he state he actually used the camera) states,"The D700 can record full-resolution JPEG images at an astounding 5 fps, or eight fps with the optional MB-D10 battery pack for up to 100 images, or up to 17 lossless 14-bit Nikon NEF (RAW) files." Do the "17 lossless 14-bit NEF's" record at 5 fps or 8 with the MB-D10? Not the way I read the press release - but I'll grant that it's ambiguous enough that I'll wait until a reviewer who is actually TESTING the camera reports some real world results.
I notice Mr. Gailbraith (and the press release) failed to mention that live histogram was missing. More evidence that this was a preview, since a reviewer as thorough as Rob would have made note of that (and I mean that seriously).
We are all excited about this new camera, but let's not get carried away and start ignoring its shortcomings. I jumped on the D300 right away because it was clearly superior to the D200 in ways that were important to me. I'm not yet convinced that the D700 is that much better than the D300 in ways that are important to me. AF low light TRACKING performance is the biggest concern to me, followed by lack of live histogram, followed by RAW burst speed. Others with different needs may prioritize these differently, not care, or have additional concerns. The big known positive for me is full-frame so I can get the most out of some of my lenses, especially the 24PC-E and the 85 f/1.4. One stop or even 2 stops better noise performance would be nice, but not critical.