I guess the best way to answer this is to not, but I am not that smart. It is like answering "When did you stop beating your wife?" Actually, I haven't stopped beating my wife, at least to the remote control.... ;-)
There has been plenty of positive comments written about the S-92, I won't quote all those who find it smooth, powerful, fast and agile. Pprune would balk at the number of lines consumed were I to post them all.
As to the market fitness, those who have flown the machine generally are very positive about it, and some are so positive they actually buy it. More buy it than the Brand X mentioned, which leads me to think that the market is finding it quite fine, actually.
The displays are quite a bit more capable than those in the other brand mentioned, I think. They are not ProLine at all.
Prospective buyers like the performance and find that it has about a ton more payload than brand x (who have grown their gross weight twice since the S-92 was introduced, and still fall far short). The economics are great (and backed by a Total Assurance Package - a whole aircraft hourly rate for maintenance). The safety features are a generation ahead of the others (flaw tolerance alone is worth crowing about, where an S-92 can take a .040" pit or gouge on any critical part in any critical location for at least 1250 hours without allowing a crack to form.) The crashworthiness is a real factor, where the fuselage, landing gear and the stroking seats are a generation ahead of brand X (who offers some of these features if pressed, but has yet to even design them let alone try to certify them. Watch the productivity tumble when these features are added to the already lesser payoad!
All this being said, let the games continue, as they will. The market will decide.