Recently I had to use a Nikon D5100 for a few days on a trip to Paris and everything seemed so cumbersome too me - the size, the menus, the lack of an EVF (having to review photos on the screen is such a waste of time). The only thing I really liked was the fully articulated screen. I guess I can never switch to a DSLR at this point.
Granted that it is not always practical, but the through-the-lens (TTL) viewfinder is actually a pretty big advantage for the DSLR's, even if it doesn't appear like it for the masses and casual users. And it's probably the very reason professionals keep swearing by it.
It almost virtually costs no energy to keep going but it is usable accurately (or rather, predictably) in plain daylight unlike most screens. Sure live-view and the like are very interesting, and using the screen instead makes a lot of practical sense when you want to shoot from angles... but it also drains battery really fast. Also, electronic viewfinders are very expensive and they'll never be standard due to that.
Once you really know the camera and get used to photography specifics (meaning you can predict results accurately), you simply use it as if it was an analog camera, configure the settings and shoot, check for the result if you have doubts. And the battery lasts for weeks of hardcore shooting. That's the way to use them, as to be honest, live-view on the Nikon's is actually atrocious.
I don't even know why I have a second battery for my Nikon, as I usually don't rely on the screen, it's articulated and it's usually closed against the body (ie: disabled), when the battery is running out I still manage to take more than a hundred shots, at least. It's good. Mirrorless cameras? (and compact cameras as well) unless you turn off the screen and use them blind as a bat not so much, way more "drainy" and when you're on a trip in Paris... that kinda sucks if you don't own spare batteries.
The Nikon D5100 is also ancient, menus have changed a bit for the better, albeit I agree, all DSLR's menus feel... fragmented (the cameras with WiFi and GPS have them work as add-ons only accessible via menus) and conectivity like transfering your photos via Wifi on Nikon only works on Android, no PC/Mac app. It's kinda ridiculous. And GPS needs a file supplied by Nikon, every month.
They're also not designed for touchscreens at all so new DSLR cameras with them feel like when all smartphones started to have it but their systems (like Nokia's Symbian) clearly weren't designed for it, after messing with cell phones not having "tap to focus" can also feel limiting. But... Focus systems are different on DSLR's and mirrorless, specifically, phase detection versus contrast-based AF.
And they're different. But... Phase detection is known to be better when dealing with low light situations. This is going to get better as sensors are more and more designed for low light, everything will be BSI in a few years for example.
Backtracking though, as cluttered and fragmented as DSLR's menus are, and cheap with the omission of focus peaking and histogram in every model but the fagship, they still have the more professional flexibility and the best JPEG engines going on (but that's because Canon and Nikon are not serious about mirrorless yet). Flexibility though, makes Sony cameras (for instance) often feel quirky and clutered as well, even if yes, they feel fresher.
I always felt this was a good article. Mirrorless is the future, but for the time being a lot of DSLR people will be DSLR people with a few advantages going for it. And more than new mounts established brands should be doing mirrorless for the mounts they have. Like Pentax doing mirrorless compatible with their K-mount (from the 70's) or the better Sony mirrorless not using the new E-mount but the older Sony/Minolta A-mount. They're not huge ass due to that just a little extra lenght that is completly worth it for the lens it can use.