I think you'll be very pleased - I recently went through an XZ-2 (a troubled camera, IMO) and an LX7 (perfect in every way but size) to an RX100 and have to say I'm really happy. For now, anyway...
...you know how these things go. The ability to put the RX100 in my shirt pocket turned out to completely trump all the other advantages and disadvantages among these three (few of which were compelling, for my needs and wants).
Part of me would really love to spring for an RX100 II, but rationally I'm having trouble getting there, for the following reasons. If you all can convince me, please do! Here's how I see the Mk2 changes:
1. Higher ISO Sensitivity - nice to have about 2/3 stop better high ISO performance, but that's not a huge margin and the RX100 performs well at high ISOs already. There is also a downside, which is the corresponding increase in base ISO sensitivity, which sort of highlights the slightly strange decision not to include an ND filter in these cameras.
2. Tilt LCD - nice to have, but my OM-D EM5 has that and I've only used it once in about a year...my G5 has a fully articulated screen and, again, I've used it exactly once...so that does not seem compelling for my uses, and it's possible that those extra few millimeters of thickness could affect its pocketability, which would be bad.
3. Accessory shoe - I like the idea of external viewfinders a lot, for several reasons, but once again it takes the camera out of the shirt pocket category - and into the bargain, the Sony EVF is around $450 right now, more than many "serious compact" cameras cost. I wouldn't use any other accessories in the shoe, so that doesn't seem compelling...
I have one of the MkIIs on pre-order, but I'm really thinking I should cancel...