These are the first-5-minutes impressions that may change over time.

Looks smaller than expected. Marginally bigger than Aimpoint Micro but the extra 0.5cm is well appreciated in the objective. In fact it hits  just the right size, not too small and not too large.  The larger objective gathers more light. The picture quality will be better and brighter according to the laws of physics.

The overall quality seems nice. The brightness settings have that positive click to it, lots more than T1 series. The lowest setting is good and very sharp, #2 seems like a very fine dot for extended ranges and brighter settings to be used in sunlight.

It has that quality mini-ACOG feel to it and if it deliveres performance wise, it's an AIMpoint killer as it has more features for lower price and made domestically.
There is no reason to get a 20mm objective optic IMO when you have this.

Last note, don't get it if you have astigmatism, my first look resulted in OMG! It's not a dot but a mini-galaxy and I think it was rotating (joke).  Looked at it with another eye and wow, what a nice, almost round dot. Took a picture of it and sure enough, nothing wrong with the dot. I got it for a 12 gauge so I don't need Uber-precision.  I do not recall the T1 dot being that out of shape.  The answer is my astigmatism got worse over the years.

FWIW, it didn't come with the mount screws, just the box and the paper manuals so I hope the mount I get comes with them. What is the size of the screws?
I will have to contact Trijicon if  the ADM low mount does not come with the screws either.

The microfiber cleaning cloth is a nice touch.  I don't recommend cleaning the optic all that often as it often leaves micro-scratches but it can be useful for eyeglasses and stuff.

Your larger objective is not gathering more light.  You're thinking of a magnifying optic, which these are not.  If it seems brighter than you are used to, it could be the anti-refection coating are superior to your norm.

What the larger objective does is increase the field of view through the optic.

Well you have an interesting point. And optics manufacturers constantly upgrade coatings without announcing it. So the 2018 version of MRO or T1 or any other optic might be brighter than the same model 2 years ago. However I still that all things being the same, a larger objective is just better. I had the latest-greatest T1, at that time and got an older Comp M4 also and the M4 just looked so much better - and definitely brighter. We are talking 30mm objective vs 20mm objective.

Optical devices do not project or gather or make light.  They transmit light and a larger objective transmits more light than a smaller one. Resulting in a picture that's a bit brighter.
40>30>20mm

Whether there is a power involved or it's 1.0 power.

Light gathering isn't a function of a larger objective on a magnifying optic either.

What a larger objective does, is make for a bigger eyebox.

Just to make one thing perfectly clear - I put my eyeglasses on - the red dot is very sharp when the astigmatism is corrected. I can see that thing being used to way out there type of ranges.

Sure it is.  More photons intercepted = brighter image.  That is, as long as the optical coatings are decent.  Large apertures are used in telescopes for good reason, otherwise Hubble could be a lot smaller.  The thing is, the larger the objective, the harder ($) it is to make with good quality.

Aperture/objective size also affects resolution of the optic, as well.

You have an astigmatism and you aren't wearing your glasses all the time?  

I have the same condition and always were my glasses.   I also have the MRO and didn't notice the "galaxy" effect.

It's called contact lenses but my condition is not strong enough for astigmatism correction, it's kinda borderline.  Apparently it only shows up when looking at RDS.

Eotech was not any better, also got the galaxy effect.   Pretty much the only thing you can do, other than wearing corrective lenses, is shrink the dot to the minimum and then it's very sharp.

It's a fine device, not any better or worse than Aimpoint red dot picture quality. It's just a glowing LED that consumes the very minimum mAh and lasts for years.

Or are they?.....

Everything about the MRO is great IMO except the damn slight magnification.  It really fucks with my sight picture when shooting both eyes open.  The T2 dot looks a little crisper, the T2 has no tint (tint didn't bother me on the MRO), T2 is smaller, T2 has far less parallax, BUT T2 is almost twice the price.  The MRO is a great option, but I wouldn't call it an aimpoint killer.  Unfortunately they didn't work well for me

I compared Aimpoint Comp M4 and T1 side by side. The M4 was noticeably brighter.  I mean it was obvious.  Just brighter.

I don't know that I can quantify the brightness difference between MRO and T1/T2 series. Physics suggests it should be brighter, in real life you cannot see it easily. But only under some specific conditions.
Essentially the larger objective has no disadvantages. It's a hair heavier and larger which is a good thing.
It's using the same lithium coin battery which leads to compactness

I think they hit just the right balance between price / features / size. Comp M4 is technically nicer/brighter but it's huge/heavy/bulky and maybe expensive and uses relatively huge batteries.

It's using the same lithium coin battery which leads to compactness

If this thing can handle recoil and does not disintegrate due to shotgun recoil, none of the switches stop working and it's waterproof, etc. we have a winner.   I don't see then what's the point of the T-series. Higher price, fewer features.

And you buy domestic.

I do not mind the slight magnification. What's so bad about it?

I mean, 1.05? Seriously? I will take that. Think of it as a feature, not a bug. H3ll, if they can install 1.1x into it, that will be super cool. It's a red dot but also a bit like a scope in the sense it magnifies.  I really like the 1.5X ACOGs and yeah you can use them with both eyes open also so  a hair over 1.0 is not an issue at all in a red dot.

More blue tint than Aimpoint micro series 2's.  Much much more parallax by order of over 200%. RDS are meant with both eyes open...window size is a trivial variable.   And ugly as sin.

People can decide if those knocks are worth saving $300.  I'll take a T2 every day of the week.

It's not really fair to compare the first gen MRO against what amounts to a second Gen Micro. Also, I have yet to see this enormous parallax you speak of, and what I have seen is definitely not 13"+. Just setting my MRO on the table and aiming it at the mailbox across the street (~35y) I see very little movement. At the range at 50y aiming from the sides it's still center of Target. Your sample size just doesn't match mine.

And looks are obviously relative. I happen to love Mario Brothers lol

What tint? The post 90K series has has a very neutral tint, that is, I don't see any.   I have not had the luxury of looking through the original one.
You realize that all optics makers constantly revise their coatings without announcing so. That includes Trijicon, Aimpoint and Zeiss, Swarovski, Schmidt & Bender, etc. etc. The MRO has been out for a while. I am sure they have gone through several iterations of coatings.

The brightness adjustment is in a bit odd place, I think I would have preferred it on the right a la aimpoint but the adjustment knob on top does grow on you. I think I've accepted it there.  It's kind of symmetrical that way.

Ive compared them side by side in another post... Yes the tint difference is noticeable side by side .. Yes the slight mag is noticeable side by side... the forging finish on my 38k serial # was butter smooth.

My 89k+ serial #:
forging was rough as fk with a couple of sharp edges and pits
The ill knob is stiff as fk
The elev and wind adjustments are much more positive
The illum is brighter than the 38k on the same setting

But at the end of the day I don't care about that... its built like an ACOG... i've seen enough torture tests, shotgun blasts and explosions of MROs to know they're tough as tanks.

If you're not comparing them side by side you'd never know the difference.

The issue with it is that when you shoot with both eyes open (as you should with any red dot), you are seeing 2 separate images (one with your left eye and one with your right) that your brain will splice together so that you see one coherent image.  If you are seeing the target at 1.1x with one eye and seeing that same target at 1x through your other eye, your brain will actually process that as two separate targets, one (the magnified) slightly closer than the other which will cause a slight doubling of the target bc that is how your brain is perceiving it (the 1.1x magnified target slightly in front of the 1x).  With something like an acog, you depend on your dominant eye taking over and that is why you only see the magnified target.... that isn't how it is supposed to work with RDs... you are supposed to be able to use your natural binocular vision with the dot projected on what you are looking at.  If you shoot with your non shooting eye closed, this doesn't matter and maybe the slight magnification is a positive to you, but that isn't how you are supposed to be doing it.

I REALLY REALLY wanted to like the MRO bc I have had wonderful experiences with their CS and would love to be a loyal customer, I wish I could defend the MRO, but Trijicon RDs have just fallen short of what they should be.  I don't understand why, but they need to fix the whole 1.1x thing... it actually is a serious problem when it comes to RDs.

All eyes are different. I have astigmatism. My experience was this....the pre 89k MRO I had was the absolute worst looking 2 MOA dot I had seen. The post 89k serial number MRO is hands down the best looking dot I’ve seen, next to the EOTech 1 MOA center dot. The newer model MRO is about 25% crisper to me than my Aimpoint PRO. YMMV.

Has Trijicon ever explained WHY they added that little bit of magnification?

Interesting points you make.

As they say, it is not a bug, it is a feature.

I have multiple Aimpoints and MRO's.  I get less starburst from the MRO than the Aimpoint.

.  They are not magnifying it on purpose... the blue tint is intentional but the magnification is not, and sure as fuck isn't a feature.  How exactly is it a feature again ?....

I was being facetious.

There is no magnification on my unit.

I wish there was, but there isn't.

ahhhh... i see.  Supposedly they got it cleared up so i need to try another.... I am just too deep in the T2 game right now i guess hah

I have an older MRO. It just started to get a bloom and when used in conjunction with an Aimpoint 3X magnifier, there is a massive slash that takes up the entire sight pictures. I called Trijicon and they said that they have had a lot of issues with people trying to use magnifiers with them. They also said that each unit is hand made and there can be some slight variation from one unit to another. I am sending it back and hoping for a new one

Keep updated how it turns out.