Unless one is in a hurry to keep up with the Jones's or should I say, Lemmings, it doesn't matter what you call Windows "7". Truth be known, it's just a Windows Vista bug fix anyway. Yes, I do have the Evaluation copy, and I see no fantastic improvement-anywhere. Instead, it's just another Microsoft hype. No wonder the company is losing market share. Maybe they should rethink their hiring and "contracting" practices to recruit more creative and less "copycat" employees... It's funny. As a programmer since the mid-80's, I've seen the hardware improve, and the software has donned a great deal of bells and whistles, but most people, myself included, prefer more reliable performance and speed. I remember when I had a Amiga, for example, in 1983, and I cold get up and running with a Motorola 68000 processor in less than 30 seconds. If you put Window 3.0 or Windows 3.11 on a machine today (6-8MB OSs), you could do the same probably, and still run an older version of Word, Excel, etc. Newer is not necessarily better. I keep my old software, hardware, and still use it. There is practically nothing you can't do with it. You can even make it look new with Siverlight-like simulation; and, with present-day memory and storage solutions, it runs much faster. "Where there is a will, there is a way..." As for Windows 7, I'm not going to run out and throw away $200-400 for it... after all, "the fool and his/her money are soon parted..."