Not sure if anyone else out there has the RTM edition of Win7, but even after applying the latest nvidia win 7 drivers, I still get (what I can only describe as) a 4:3 ratio screen on my 1680 x 1050 monitor when I launch a game. Desktop resolution is fine though.
Will start to google this and see if anyone else is having this issue.
The only reason I bring it up is we (my works) have received this release code from Microsoft as official release to manufacturer (so I'm ruling out any leaked edition issues).
Sadly work will not provide me with an activation code though (unless I buy the laptop that goes with it! :)

I have Win7 RC build 7100 on 4 laptops and 3 computers, one of the laptops running 64bit, personally I find it runs great esp. compared to Vista which is what was removed on some of these machines to test out.
I have a Microsoft MSDN Subscription and no Win 7 RTM yet, I believe anything that you may have that is RTM is a "leaked" and not true release of RTM as per
http://windowsteamblog.com/blogs/windows7/archive/2009/07/13/update-on-windows-7-rtm.aspx
http://www.techpowerup.com/index.php?99211
Makes me wonder who at your company feels they have the RTM copy seeing the world is still waiting on it :)
I play Steam games on my x64bit Win7 plus Eve Online, JTF, all play without issue, you may find you have a "daily" build version 7600 which isn't the "released" code per se. I would seriously consider uninstalling and waiting for the true RTM in the next week or so before I would install too much on this questionable build.

It seems kind of strange to be discussing an OS on GoG, but I would like to address the topic at hand.
I am currently running Windows 7 RC, and I think it's considerably better than Vista. It feels like Vista SP5, to me. Do I think Vista is going to end up like Windows ME? Yes. It appears that Microsoft is putting all of its energy into making sure Windows 7 overcomes the major issues which have plagued their operating system for years:
1) Backward compatibility;
2) Accessibility and ease of personalized setup;
3) Adaptability (open-ended architecture).
Why is MS doing this? Probably because there are new operating systems coming down the pipe which are a serious threat to MS dominance. If Microsoft doesn't make sure that people can set up their computers the way they want, using the programs and peripherals they want, all with a minimum of fuss, then Windows is on its way out.
Well, that's my opinion, anyway.
-Khalaq

do you mind if i ask WHY it is such a big improvement over vista? Nothing I've seen mentioned yet seems much more than minor tweaks.

I looked through all of the different options and pricing and I have decided to go with Windows 7 Home 64-bit, which I am planning to get by buying the OEM version of Vista Home Premium for $109.99 at newegg and it comes with a free upgrade to Windows 7.
Here is the link: [url=]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116674[/url]
If you want Windows 7 Ultimate you could buy Vista Ultimate for $189.99 and get a free upgrade
Here is that link: [url=]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116675[/url]
PS I am running the 64 bit RC right now and it has proven to be very stable with now issues. I would recommend it. Just to let all the XP fans know, if you hated vista for its looks and interface you will hate Windows 7 more.
On of my greatest problems with XP is that it will not properly support a quad core processor and that is going to be common in the next 5 years or so...
I found this is much cheaper than any offer you will get to buy Windows 7 new.
There is also plenty of upgrade deals out there, if you already have XP/Vista.

I played around with Windows 7 a bit and I didn't really see anything there that was radically different from Vista. It's the same basic OS with little tweaks here and there. In one area, it's actually worse - the UAC is not as secure here as it is in Vista.
My theory with all the Windows 7 praise going around is that most of it is from XP users who desperately need to finally move to a next gen OS who are trying to save face. They know they bashed Vista so if they migrated to 7 it would look bad. Thus the praise at what an improvement 7 is when in reality it's just Vista SP3. :)

It really depends on what features you are using. Many people don't use all of the new features added by Vista as it is.
One of the features I really like in Windows 7 is the standardisation of devices. The Devices and Printers panel provides a user-friendly overview of all attached devices, all of which have useful functionality when right-clicked. Double-clicking on a device displays its Device Stage (if supported). The Device Stage allows most or all device functions to be controlled from a standardised layout rather than through vendor-specific utilities. All Device Stage functionality is included in the drivers themselves; no separate installation is required. Attaching a supported device will automatically open its Device Stage window rather than Autoplay, so you'll know at once whether a device is supported. Device Stage integration is not required for logo certification, however, so some manufacturers may not bother supporting it, especially for older devices. Where possible Windows provides a Device Stage for unsupported devices, although of course this tends to have fewer functions and has a generic layout rather than a fancy, device-specific banner at the top.
Libraries is another nice feature which allows files to be drawn together from several locations on the system or even over a network. They are all displayed in a single folder as if they were all physically located in that location. Default ones are included for pictures, videos, etc. and new ones can be easily added.

I love it... it runs faster than Vista and much more stable. And I'm talking about an upgrade not a fresh install so I think if anything it's speed and some of it's more useful UI changes should make it more than worth the money

i just KNOW i'm gonna tempt fate here, but i haven't had a single crash on vista... not even running old software that isn't supposed to be compatible. it has really impressed me... which was totally not what i was expecting.
I'd love to have windows7, but only if i get it for free ;-)
However if you have the cash for the preorder bonus, or if you are going straight from XP (and your PC is fast enough) win7 sounds like a great idea.

I've been testing the RC some, but it doesn't like something in my system, and I have no idea what it is. I had a lot of trouble with the installation completely freezing my computer, and when I finally got it to install, there are a few quirks (features they call them) that I could live without.
I don't mind new features being introduced at all, but I wish they wouldn't completely discard the older way of doing things and give the people who refuse to change (like me) an option to do some things the old way.

If you want to use Windows in a particular manner and refuse to learn newer, better methods, you should stick with whatever version was designed to work that way rather than upgrading and being disappointed. Microsoft is dedicated to advancing the usability and functionality of their products, and retaining outdated functionality for too long interferes with this goal.
Microsoft retires outdated and outmoded features because they know what they are doing, as silly as that may sound; radically new ways of doing things (like the Ribbon, instant search, superbar and jumplists) may seem awkward at first but turn out to be more efficient and approachable than the old method ever was. They have done countless hours of customer experience testing with everyday users, both face-to-face and through the optional automated feedback features of most recent Microsoft products, and also pay attention to feedback submitted by beta program users; these various methods let them see how people use their products and lead directly to changes in future product versions. This can be something as simple as whether the Quick Launch toolbar is displayed by default (it was off in XP but turned on in Vista due to feedback) or something as major as redesigning a whole dialog box or menu.

windows 7 is still very different from xp... its what vista should have been from the start.
vista after sp1 isn't terrible... but 7 is lighter, faster, and more stable (rc is more stable than fully patched vista sp1)
and to defuse declarations of shenanigans: i was at one point a elitist linux biggot.
windows 7 doesn't have bash, but its definitely useable...
and not having to do the "configure,make, and cry" dance is always welcomed.

[/sales pitch]
I don't think all the methods they are pushing with 7 are better. And I'm certainly not the only one to think that. Sadly, we are the minority. I mean, jumping from XP to 7 is not a huge difference, it's still a Windows OS and feels like one, but it's the little things that bother me. Small things like automatic folder refreshes and some things about the "superbar" just make it seem like I have to do more to get the same amount of work done that I did with XP. More clicks, more mouse moving, more keyboard presses. That kind of stuff piles up pretty fast.
That's just my experience though and to each their own of course.

Can you not do the classic mode, make it look like Win2K and make it run a lot faster and less flashy?

You can disable all the Aero business and make it look like Win2K, but it still functions the same, sadly.
It's really a shame too, because I like to get my hands on new stuff.