I have to agree. Which camera to get is much less important than "take lots of pictures." Some things like composition and editing you can learn on just about anything that takes a picture. True, there are advantages to larger sensors, interchangable lenses, etc. But for a first camera, get something you will carry with you and take lots of pictures. I still miss shooting film on a manual camera. Once you get the hang of it, it's fast and simple. There are still lots of good films, though fewer than there used to be. And nothing digital (under a few grand at least) comes close for image quality. But, and this is a big "but", the one advantage of digital photography is it's easy to take tons of pictures, toss out the bad ones, edit the good ones and learn a ton about composing shots. A typical digital camera stores 100s if not 1000s of photos, and once you upload them you can resuse the card. Compare that to 35mm where 36 exposures was the best you could get without loading your own canisters. Also, editing is a snap. Picassa is free and does a nice job with cropping and red-eye reduction. Gimp or Photoshop will let you do things that take years of darkroom experience to do and without building a darkroom in the basement. While the equipment matters, it matters more to an experienced photographer. Until you get the basics down, composition is way more important than say depth of field. So get a decent point and shoot digital and start taking pictures. Lot and lots of pictures. Read a few books. Take the time to edit and critique your shots.
Later, you'll likely realize the limitations of that camera and want to upgrade to a micro 4/3, DSLR, or perhaps even a classic 35mm SLR. Then it's time to start worrying about technology and features. But by then you'll know better what you want for the kind of shooting you do. And you can keep the digital point and shoot as a "carry camera."