Yeah, of course I do
I can divorce it from what's needed to be considered when shooting though. It's like driving. I love cars, and find engineering, design and production of them interesting, but when I'm actually driving, I'm only considering the effects of those things, not the things themselves.
The D700 was a milestone camera, and I feel people are just too emotionally attached to it. While I appreciate the technology of cameras, they are.. to me anyway.... merely tools. I would never get my cameras out to "play" with them, or look at them, and I just don't get the whole put them in a glass case thing - I mean, you wouldn't get a car mechanic putting his tools in a glass case in his living room. Half the time I can't even be arsed cleaning them... LOL. They are tools to me. When a demonstrably better tool comes along, I discard the old one in favour of the new one if I can see a benefit to doing so. I feel no emotional link with the old one. I only seem to have this attitude to digital cameras though. Film cameras are different. While there's no emotional attachment, I think it's the fact that all of them.... every single one, is still viable as a working tool today, because with film cameras, the lens and film stock are what create the differences. I wish I still had a Nikon F3 for instance... just a pleasure to use if I want to work manually with 35mm film (which admittedly isn't often, and probably why I've never bothered getting another F3)... just as much now, as it was back in 1980. However, using a Nikon D1 now, would be a serious pain in the arse, and not only due to quality of image either. Digital cameras, by default, are just like white goods: They become obsolete, and you move on. I won't mourn the loss of my D800 when I move on any more than I mourned the loss of my last fridge.
I'M not viewing it as a "replacement" for anything. Why not just judge it for what it is instead? At the time, the D800 was without a doubt the closest thing to a D700 possible. Same size, weight, handling, layout, price point, pro body.. etc etc. The only difference was a loss of continuous shooting speed, and the 36mp... which I personally never saw as a problem. That role, so far as I'm concerned now rests with the D810, which I think that anyone who wants a D700 replacement should be thinking of as the "new D700", not the D750. There's far more reason to think of the D810 as the D700 replacement. For some reason that utterly baffles me, people refuse to consider this because "the files are too big".... which is a laughable reason IMO.