A great thread and responses that remind me of the "old days."
I do not have a modern Commander in 9mm and haven't had the chance to shoot one. Do have a really nice .45, which is an excellent gun. In general, I think the new Colts I have seen are better than the older ones, if not in finish, definitely in fit. That's just my impression. My experience with the newer guns is limited, but I like the ones I have seen and fired.
Yes, IMO, the 1911 trigger does take a bit of getting used to for us S&W revolver shooters. I've been shooting pistols since I was of age that now would be considered "child abuse" to let handle, let alone fire, a handgun. Even now, I still have a bit of trouble putting down the revolver and picking up a 1911, so I usually shoot the 1911 first, when I take both to the range. I have seen others who claim otherwise, but most of these folks seem not particularly interested in precision shooting, or maybe they have a different concept of it.

That said, I realize some will disagree and can switch back and forth easily.
My opinion on Commanders, in general, is that the new ones are set-up wrong. I much prefer them set-up like a 1911A1, which is to say with the standard length trigger and arched mainspring housing. I do like the beavertail safety, particularly the one S&W used on my 1911Sc Commander, since it allows the highest grip possible on the gun.
As for grip panels, I am no fan of particularly thin ones. The rougher the better, in my view. I have VZ panels on my lightweight guns. Nowadays, I consider them a "necessity" on a .45 Commander.