Wow, I've been using 7 since it was in beta form all the way to RTM, some small features I haven't used yet that you meantion but not too shabby. Like the fact that I don't have 20 or so icons on the taskbar that don't need to be there.

Still has WGA though not saying I wanna load it on 10 machines but if I upgrade my hardware I don't wanna spend half an hour on the phone explaining to the guy/girl what I did to My machine and why I am re-installing My O.S. off the disc I bought using the code I acquired through said purchase of the disc. Sorry fixed a friends computer he has no home phone girlfriend had his cell and my was basically dead.

I want to make the change to Windows 7, curently using Windows XP. I purposely did not go for Vista. I have a question that maybe someo of you can answer. I want to runthe 64 bit version because I use a 64 bit processor and I can get some extra Ram. I noticed that past 64 bit OS have had compatibility issues with some software. I love the fact that i runs the software much faster, but if it does not run the software you use, it is useless. Is there a place that can tell me if my favorite software is compatibel with Windows 7 64 bit? Has anyone had any problems with it?

A HUGE one for me is sharing my wife's itunes library over the network and telling WM Player to include music from there, due to the native .aac support.

Sorry to post again, but in regards to MPARHAM's comment. I don't run a lot of software that's not mainstream. One thing that I can tell you is that if the software has a "Vista" endorsment, much like hardware, it was required to be 64-bit compliant.

On that note, for the first time EVER, i didn't need to load my motherboard drivers. The entire system worked with Win 7 support , alone. Chipset, NIC, even my video card "mostly" worked under the windows driver, although I ended up getting Catalyst Control Center anyway to run crossfire. Very positive experience.

Uh, a couple of problems here: the Snipping Tool and the Open Command Window Here option are both available in Vista. So there go two of Mick's putative Win 7 favorites. (Have ya used Vista, Mick? I mean, really?) Moreover, even if the right-click command prompt option *weren't* available, it's easy to configure via a reg edit (or via free third-party tools).

A Win7 near-dealbreaker is its lack of the classic shell. I don't know how anyone can view the Vista or (slightly) improved Win 7 Aero shell/Start Menu as easier or more productive to use. Sigh.

Uh, a couple of problems here: the Snipping Tool and the Open Command Window Here option are both available in Vista. So there go two of Mick's putative Win 7 favorites. (Have ya used Vista, Mick? I mean, really?) Moreover, even if the right-click command prompt option *weren't* available, it's easy to configure via a reg edit (or via free third-party tools).

A Win7 near-dealbreaker is its lack of the classic shell. I don't know how anyone can view the Vista or (slightly) improved Win 7 Aero shell/Start Menu as easier or more productive to use. Sigh.

What i miss is that you cant Copy to or Move to from folder to folder that option is not there no more on the left pane in the folder like it was in XP

I'm suppose to spend hundreds of $ for these features!!! I don't think so.

I see no compelling reasons at all in this article to leave my XP machine that is working fine.

+1 pocketdrummer

@pocketdrummer: when I bought a retail box for a piece of software a few years ago, it bore the mention 'Windows XP or better'. So, I installed Linux.

As early as 2005 I had a 3D desktop, administrator prompts that popped only when administrative tasks really had to be performed (and it popped only once for a given task, without disrupting what I was doing at the time), a web browser that could open several pages in a single window, a system that didn't fall prey to the worm-of-the-month and had a WORKING firewall, a real command line, a system that didn't require a pair of reboots on each and every update and that didn't need a complete reinstall every time a piece of hardware was changed, and that didn't require 1 Gb of RAM only to boot in less than 10 minutes.

And, even better, it didn't require a complete backup, format and reinstall every time it pooped in its registry.

So, how long did it take you to embrace these new technologies? I've been using them daily for more than 4 years now. Are you saying you've started using them only last april?

I really can't understand why people are so reluctant to embrace new technology.

@Mitch074: is not about embracing new technology, is about using the latest on that branch, if by your statement you say that you can use your old 486 processor to run all that, then gratz for you, but i want to use the latest graphic cards to launch the latest video games that are released on the directX technology, that's embracing the latest technology for the Microsoft side of technology, but for each their own. I can see your focus on network and server technologies. I would say that if you were using the first version that Red hat released a few years ago, then yea... you are not using the latest and not embracing the technology, so i guess pocketdrummer was saying more to the fact of using the latest on Microsoft technologies and not among different technologies and i guess each OS suits different purposes.

@Mitch; Don't forget to mention 3d accelerated desktops in linux didn't get remotely stable until about 2008.

Having worked for a number of shops with other sysadmins, you'd likely get laughed out of the office if you show up with your jiggly windows in Ubuntu thinking you are all cutting edge..

"Everyone I meet enthuses about a different area of Windows 7"

I really liked the way the ATI advertorial was labeled. Could this article use a label too ?

p.s. I standardized on VISTA a few years ago, and have only 2 older machines still running XP. For those on XP, Media Center is a killer app for vista and (hopefully) win 7 vs. XP. (What, you still watch only what's available live and don't sue the pause button? shocking.)

Windows needs to have a real command line interface compatible with terminal redirection.
It's an invaluable tool in administering Linux remotely, especially on headless (granted, an unlikely scenario with Windows) or crippled machines.