Originally published on: 4/11/2009 9:43:48 PM
I've got a theory about most reviews of products online. Actually, it's mostly a theory about electronics, technology and software, though it definitely holds in other areas as well. My theory points to the following scenario being behind something like 80% of the reviews you read about this stuff.

A person does a bunch of reading, often of pre-release information, about the product. They place an order and anxiously hit F5 on UPS.com for 2-3 days watching their package bounce around the country until the doorbell rings and they scrawl their unrecognizable John Hancock on with that plastic pen.
As they take the package into the house, they reach for the digital camera and a box cutter and tear open the brown shell to document the technological goo within. They push the buttons, flip the switches, glance through the menus and, about 10 minutes later, they start writing their review, which often consists of them going over the marketing materials and checking features off as they find them on the device.
I think that's a problem.
I've got more gadgets than the average bear and have had my fair share of "normal" stuff like cars, houses, lawn mowers, etc. And, without exception, those products were VERY different a few weeks, few months and few years after I first got them.
Some gadgets that I wasn't entirely sure about turned out to be some of my absolute favorite. Worse however, were the gadgets, devices, luggage, and other stuff that I was thrilled to have bought only to discover the problems later. When I read a review or someone's summary of getting the item, I want to know what those downsides are, because EVERYTHING has them.
So, I'm not really a fan of the whole genre of "unboxing" articles/videos/etc. They're fine for what they are, but they focus exclusively on the first impression, which is, by definition, a small part of your total experience with a product or service.
That's why, a while back, I promised myself I wouldn't jump in with my assessment of any particular technology until I'd lived with it for a while. And, after installing the Windows 7 beta a month ago on my laptop, Windows 7 is something I've lived with for a while, so here are my impressions.
I've been running "Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit Build 7000" on my Thinkpad R61 laptop with 4GB of RAM, a 200GB 7200RPM primary hard drive, and a 320GB 5400RPM secondary hard drive.
For the most part, it contains my normal daily stack of software: Visual Studio 2008, XMind, E Text Editor, the developer browser cluster (IE/Firefox/Chrome/Safari/Opera), Windows Live Writer, OpenOffice.org (instead of MSOffice 2007, due to not wanting to deal with activation on what's a temporary setup), my giant pile of utilities, etc. The only "big" thing missing from what I'd consider a normal workstation is a regular install of SQL Server 2008.
Overall, my impression is that this release will fit into Microsoft's existing pattern of Windows versions.
Some of the refinements are pretty handy:
What's not so great
I Don't Care
You're going to see reviews all over the place about things like the Aero glass, desktop gadgets, wallpaper that shuffles,improved Paint, rebuilt calculator, how "slick" and "smooth" it is, heck, even the improvements to security. I, personally don't care about most of that. It's all stuff I never use, turn off, etc.
Like I've told 1000 salespeople over the years. If it's not a feature I use, it's not actually a benefit you can convince me is worth paying for. All of that stuff fits there for me.
Overall
I know that lots of people either love or hate Windows. The same is true of Mac and Linux. I *like* them all. I still like Linux and I still like Mac. And, this release makes me like Windows a little morstronge than I did before.
While I'll keep Vista around for testing purposes, as soon as Windows 7 goes gold, I'll be upgrading any machine I can.
I'll grab the 64 bit Chrome because I really like having browser tabs running in their own process.
On the startup/shutdown, there's one bit I completely forgot to mention and that's that I'm running a driver to access my ext3 filesystem on a secondary hard drive and I suspect that's causing a problem, but, since that's the shared drive between my Linux and Windows installs, I'm not willing to give it up, though it probably makes sense to shuffle things around so that that drive's a Windows-based filesystem instead of a Linux-based one because things work better in that direction.
On performance: I dual boot Vista and 7 on marginal hardware ( really cheap notebook). 7 was much faster, until I stripped Vista of all AV, third party background software and vendor crapware. 7 is only a little faster now, so I'm assuming that some of the perceived performance increase is because it's a fresh, vendor free installation.
Startup/shutdown: I have exactly the opposite problem My Vista boot/shutdown is very,very slow and ugly, but 7 on the same laptop is fast. I'd lean towards a driver issue.