The two mills I am personally familiar with are the Alaskan Mk III and the Stihl.
The down sides to the Stihl mill are that it is not adjustable in length, it is made of steel which makes it pretty heavy and vertical adjustment is on a screw which means it takes forever. The Alaskan addresses all of these points, however adjustment in particular is a compromise.
The Stihl mill is designed to be used by two people, with a double-ended bar and a powerhead at each end. This means the weight of the mill is less of an issue. Operating singlehanded, the weight of the mill matters when you have to lug it back along the log plank after plank after plank Milling is pretty physical. It also matters because when you start the cut referencing off the cut face, the balance point of the mill is not on the log so you have to hold it there, keeping it level, pretty much just using one hand as the other is on the throttle, until the mill is far enough into the log to keep it level. I use a 36" mill but have set it up with a 47" bar on the 090 once (working with Burrell) and I started the cut alone, although we both pushed it through. I wouldn't have wanted any extra weight when doing this. The Alaskan is largely made of aluminium and bolts together, although there is a bit of welding in the construction. There are a few steel bits and I reckon with careful material selection you could now replace many of these if you wanted to drop the weight a little further.
I wouldn't put rollers on the mill base. Although it looks like a good idea to reduce friction, and some mills have been made this way, a square section works much better as it scrapes the sawdust out of the way rather than running over it, which keeps the mill running level more effectively so the boards stay flat. Adding a winch is, however, a good way of reducing the effort (I just haven't fitted mine yet )
Not having fitted the winch, I am pushing the mill through the log. On the Alaskan, I have the handle fitted but to be honest I very rarely use it - I tend to push on the round crossbar and keep it level by varying the lean on the back rail.
The only things I would consider as improvements over the current Alaskan design are:
A better system of height adjustment. The current system is fairly quick, but is a bit of a pain to get the two ends level as they tend to jam when going up and down. The clamp piece is not captive in the U-bolt which means it's easily lost if you take the top plate off the posts completely. It is also a pain to have to keep finding the spanner to adjust, and constant torqueing is not great as if you under-do it the mill height drifts but overdo it and it shears off eventually. I wonder if a rack and pinion system with a locking knob would be an improvement (would cost more but this may not matter if you are building your own).
Standardise the bolt sizes - most of them are the same but the ones for adjusting the length are different which is a pain.
A better skid plate could be designed - when starting and finishing the cut you have the end rail and the centre support only, which can mean tricky positioning to keep the mill square as it enters and leaves the log, sometimes adjusting the centre support to ensure it runs on the log. I have another mill (bandsaw type) which uses a flat steel skid plate faced with PTFE sheet and this is much better.
Anyway, this has turned into a very long ramble but some thoughts at least!
Alec