A Seattle Times tech columnist says Win7 is "faster, apparently more stable, and presumably more secure." Convinced?

ZD Net has a good upgrade FAQ. Will I upgrade? Friends who have tested Windows 7 say it is substantially faster and easier to use.

Windows 7:

I hope will be:

a) more stable

b) faster

c) give Apple a run for its money, OS-appeal wise.

From what my friends have installed on their netbooks during the demo period, it looks like it'll get the Vista monkey off Microsoft's back.

Anything is better then Vista. Anything.

Still, Windows 7 is bringing it's A-game to Apple's OS. Some added features? The multi touch and handwriting recognition? Those are some impressive features if you got the hardware to swing it. C'mon, it's time for Operating Systems to be innovative again. Do something that wows me.

Oh. And avoids bloat. I just want Window 7 to be fast and effective to help me get my work done.

Despite people switching to Google Apps, etc. people still want familiarity with their Operating Sysytems. Amiright?

From what I've heard netbook companies that attempted to sell netbooks w/ Linux didn't turn out quite well. The casual netbook user doesn't want to tinker w/ Linux, so must returned me to get Windows-loaded netbooks.

No joke: Linux Netbooks Are Returned 4X More Than Win XP Versions, Says MSI

But in regards to Win 7, I wonder what features does it have that makes it user-friendly when compared to OS X? My family loves the iLife package, the iCal sync, Photobooth, all those fun applications that are great for the non-tech folks. As a Mac household, my family totally doesn't get those PCs are Cheaper ads that they stage at Best Buy. My family wants to know more about how computers make MY LIFE easier and more fun and less a hassle (*cough*VISTA*cough*). My office IT guy rues the day he tried to hook up our printers with the Vista upgraded PCs at work...

Windows 7 I would consider installing on my Mac Book Pro just because I can. Aesthetically, the OS is beautiful, fluid, renders graphics faster, and can give OS X a run for it's money. Functionality, you can see the variety of easy customization, file management, to make it easier for newbies to figure out Windows 7. You can tell Redmond has been paying attention to the little features and details. LifeHacker's been listing some of what they consider its Best Features if you need a primer.

Windows 7 might have stood a chance against the current Mac OS X, but have you heard about the new OS X Snow Leopard? It's supposed to be released in September, ahead of Win 7's Oct. 22 release, for a $29 upgrade for current OS X Leopard users, or just $9.95 for anyone who has purchased a Mac after June 8. Win 7 did a good job catching up to OS X Leopard (desktop enhancements, being able to view multiple windows, sharing files from computer to computer, Internet access to home media), but Snow Leopard has major improvements as well and seems to focus more on improving the performance of the system rather than adding cool but not necessarily useful features. It offers 64-bit support, improved graphics and media, multi-core processors and takes up only 5G of space. Here's a good comparison.

Windows 7 will certainly be an improvement over Vista. It's stable, faster and has some nice improvements in functionality, though it is primarily focused on improving performance. In early testing, Windows 7 substantially outperformed Vista and XP in day-to-day computing tasks, such as start-up time, application launching and performance. Anyone upgrading from Vista will be pleased after using the new OS.

But the comments in this thread are proof that the environment in which Microsoft is launching Windows 7 is substantially different than when the company settled on its current packaging and pricing approach, which emphasizes general categories of computing, such as "for the home" or "for the office." The resurgence of Apple has changed the perception of value at retail, because every shopper compares the Mac and Windows PCs as the primary "value comparison" they use.

At the same time, Google and cloud applications generally, have changed the buyer's expectations about what they can expect for their money--or simply for their attention.

Apple's Mac OS 10.6, or Snow Leopard, will ship in September for $29 as an upgrade. One version, one price. New buyers will still get the OS with a new Mac, so the upgrade is the competitive price point when looking at upgrading to Windows 7. Microsoft is sticking with its Home ($50), Professional ($100) and Ultimate ($220) packaging, followed by high-priced upgrades to Office in 2010. Again, making the comparison at retail, the Mac OS, media and office applications cost $169 total.

It's probably time for Microsoft to abandon the packaged software approach and offer a very cheap basic OS that can be customized by purchasing additional application functionality during initial configuration, or at any time after the customer starts using it. For example, sell media apps for $50, individual Office applications and other "enhancements."

This would change the focus of their marketing drastically, but would aim the company and customers at the real competition: The ability to piece together highly customized computing experiences rather than "packaged software solutions."

Then, Microsoft could focus on differentiating the OS, the value of its client-side productivity tools vs. cloud-only products.

A customizable OS - that's a great idea, godsdog, and one that would surely leave less room for customers to complain about why application A was replaced by application B, etc. The challenge would be to keep the prices of the most popular applications reasonable so that people wouldn't end up spending an outrageous amount of money for the same number of applications that are already offered as a package.

Overall, I'm looking forward to the Windows 7 release. Like ms.snarkalicious said, speed, reliability and overall effectiveness are what's most important to me.  Here's another good rundown of what to expect and, if nothing else, why not to use Vista.