This is sort of my bottom line for this conference.
I was very happy with it. Most of the talks tickled my imagination and that is the primary thing I was looking for. Many others gave me details on more technical subjects that I wanted to learn about.
I was a bit disappointed by the overall scientific level, meaning that a lot of the talks were about practical, particular experiences and I would have loved to see a bit more of hard science on the program (or maybe there was and I did not pick the right sessions). It also seemed to me that the overall computer science (and more broadly science) culture level was low (once again this is my perception, I may be awfully wrong, please feel free to flame me in that case) which made me reflect on Neville Holmes complaints in IEEE Computer about the training of software practitioners. This coming from someone who has mostly abandoned the scientific practices and principles I was trained with.
One final perception about this conference. All the speakers seemed to be familiar with each other and had made similar presentations in other conferences. The really good part about this is that all the sessions are sort of tied together. On the other hand it made me wonder if we were not falling into group think: a group of people with similar opinions reinforcing the consensus while (consciously or inconciously) excluding dissenting thoughts. This feeling is even stronger when the ties of many of the participants with thoughtworks are made visible.
Anyway, bottom line is it was great but, there as anywhere, you should not forget to be curious and skeptical.