The 1st point Artaher was bringing up is a small concern to me - the simplicity or business of styles is a personal concern to many. Some people find more inspiration in more complex styles, others like simpler ones as more versatile. You can convert styles to Yamaha format and easily edit them to make them busier, plus I understand that the newer Yamaha styles are more complex.

The second two issues are shortcomings of Yamaha: Roland does have a dynamic arranger feature, which makes the styles sound different depending on how hard you press the chord notes with your (left) hand.

Also, the Yamaha styles are recorded in 7th chord - if you are playing a major, the 7th is dropped, if playing a minor, the major 3rd is replaced with the minor 3rd note; however, the basic pattern is the same. In Roland, the major, minor, and 7th are actually individually programmed - you can make them sound very similar by copying the parts, but there is also the flexibili to make them completely different - some internal styles make use of this capabilities. This also helps in having a more varied sound. One of the other posts (I believe talking about the G70 manual) complains about having only 3 chords in Roland - that is not true - it will recognize a great variety of chords (perhaps not all of them correctly), but rather than play the single pattern (as Yamaha and Korg would), it will conjugate one of the three patterns - the one which is closest to the chord being played.

On the other hand, the Yamaha players can add variety to their styles by using multi-pads - something Roland would be smart to incorporate.

Regards