How exactly would per-user encryption help? You can encrypt your emails if you want, but if Google does it per user, they still have the key.
The fact that currently, encryption would have to happen at Google smells to me like a gigantic flaw in the whole "web apps for everything" mantra. I can not only encrypt when I run my own mail client with standard protocols, but I even get to choose whether I want to go S/MIME or PGP. Neither is an option in the webmail space unless I want to delegate crypto to the service provider.
(Depending on your conspiracy bent, you could also say this constitutes a non-flaw from Google's perspective.)
Actually, that's the whole reason for the debate, right there. Windows 8 is the next iteration of Microsoft's very late-in-coming mobile strategy. The whole reason for the hoopla in the first place is that Silverlight was the center of that strategy for WP7, but the Windows 8 demo (done on a touch screen) looks like an indicator of a Crazy Ivan shift in that mobile development strategy. The discussion about on the MS forums is about WPF and Silverlight and the whole mobile strategy. The discussion here is a some bizarre chicken-little-sky-is-falling-ms-flamebait-typical-slashdot-crapfest.
Now, you may be part of the typical slashdot crowd and believe that this is just SOP with Microsoft, and for a small subset of technologies you'd be right, but mostly that opinion is dead wrong as MS is probably one of the best companies out there at supporting legacy tech and putting out stuff with backwards compatibility in mind. It's what keeps MS in business, and it's something that has many flaws, but is their greatest strength as well. This Windows 8 announcement looks to be an abandonment of that philosophy, and it's a bit alarming. If they have something to say about WPF development for mobile, they need to say it - and quick. (Full disclosure: Professionally, I'm a