Despite the profit losses, dev shop closures, and a still generally weak economy, the gaming industry isn't doing too bad for itself.  Though 2009 might be categorized as a weak year for some, many blockbuster titles have made their way to store shelves and by proxy, into gamers hot little hands.  The biggest title of course was Modern Warfare 2, which sold about 5 million copies across 2 systems in the infancy of its release.  Another standout was New Super Mario Bros., which is expected to sell nearly as many copies on the Wii by the time the Christmas season has concluded.  Even the games that weren't certified blockbusters still pulled in some fairly decent sell-through numbers and substandard offerings weren't enough to harm things, let alone sink the ship completely.  For every disappointing Tony Hawk: Ride, there was a stellar Dirt 2.  For every horrendous Rogue Warrior... a worthy Left For Dead 2.  It was undeniably a good year for the industry at large.  Gamers had no problems shelling out for multiple titles across several different platforms.

What really put a damper on things this year though was the sheer number of titles pushed back to 2010 for no other reason than to avoid competition in the marketplace.  Publishing PR departments can call it whatever they like or spin it however they choose, but the reality is that they were (and still are) very afraid... scared that the slightest pin prick is going to burst their multi-billion dollar bubble and that all of the money is going to disappear post-haste.  Bear in mind that we're talking about an industry that has done nothing but grown and matured since 1985 with no real signs of slowing down in the slightest.  Keep putting out quality titles and folks will still line up at midnight outside Best Buy to purchase them despite a 10%+ unemployment rate.

So what's the complaint really?  2010 is right around the corner, we still had quite a number of solid offerings this year, and now everyone has time to play every game they wanted to rather than juggle.  It works out great for everyone right... right?  Well not so fast there sport.

October 22nd, 2009 was a pretty big day for Microsoft.  After the lukewarm reception (and in some cases, outright hatred) Windows Vista garnered when it was released 3 years prior, the worlds largest software vendor had another opportunity to set things right with Windows 7.  Coming out of the gate, the critical reviews of the prior BETAs and release candidates were positive, if not outright impressive.  Developer types who got their hands on the software early via MSDN or TechNet, as well as the technologically brave who were willing to take the plunge, also gave the new OS fairly high marks.  Many claimed it was everything that Windows Vista wasn't, and this alone is what makes it so great.  Is this really the case though, or is the "newness" of the product or perhaps the difference in Microsofts approach the true catalyst in winning folks back?  Not being one to fully embrace second hand accounts from the web as fact, I just had to try out the new OS for myself.  As has been the case with nearly every other Windows OS released in the last decade, I was at Best Buy on day one with credit card in hand.

After about a week of using it as my primary OS, I've found that Windows 7 is one of those rare cases where the most vocal of forum-going fanboys got it right for a change... Windows 7 is definitely a hit.  The downside is that the most typically cited reasons for such enthusiasm are often misleading at best and in some cases, entirely incorrect.