While I find your comparison interesting, IMO it veers somewhat off course, as so many similar comparisons do on other forums, like dpreview where dissent is lambasted with personal attacks by loyalists on both brands.
In the current case, you admittedly omit "output quality" as a consideration, given the difficulty this would require for objective opinion. As Vincent wisely states "one mans meat...."
That said, I believe feature comparisons should be based mainly on two issues: useful features to the intended customer and lack of necessary features for the same customer. Including things like the lack of an edit screen, no CD printing and "not a manufacturing masterpiece" as "Cons" for the HP are questionable, as the oppposing "Pros" for the Epson (except the edit screen is on neither.)
I find HP's explanation on lack of the edit screen quite reasonable. This is a large printer that is intended for use mostly with a computer and not generally considered mobile. The only time such a screen would be useful is printing in the field or when no computer is available - and that just isn't what it is designed for. I can't see many folks dashing off to grandma's to knock off a few quick prints with this monster and need an editing screen to do it. The "look" of manufacture is absolutely irrelevant to most, who are looking for features and output, not frilly cosmetics. How many serious pro's or even advanced amateurs do you really think need CD printing? I believe it's a marketing frill (others may disagree) that adds cost and potential maintenance issues and ink waste. There are other examples of such comparison categories, but I think you get my meaning.
It is not that I am an avid HP advocate, although I bought the HP over the Epson and am happy with my choice. I agree with the really meaningful "Cons" on the HP - slow, ink volume is horribly small and media are much more limited. I disagree with your finding that the HP profiles are not so good out of the box. I find them very good, except they are limited in number due to limited media. I've read where the Epson profiles need considerable tweaking, so I don't know why you feel the opposite about the Epson profiles.
Sometimes these comparisons get way off base. I like to read them anyway, as they are still of interest. I just like to also find info about the real world use and intentions of the printer and how it meets those needs. Vincent's usual approach with the full interactive reviews probably most closely approaches what I find most useful. With print output, resolution, color shifts and vibrance, as well as useful features. It was why I was disappointed that the HP 8750 came late and with little media to allow him to conduct a review similar to the R1800 review. It not only hurts HP, but it hurts those trying to make a balanced comparison between the two printers that most current buyers seem to be so closely undecided upon. In effect, I had to do some guesswork on my decision and, happily, it turned out ok for me. I could probably say the same if I had decided on the Epson instead - I'm sure the two are that close.
"You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in
the first place." -Jonathan Swift