Some of you are missing the point. The D7000 offers many pro features in a very affordable package for consumers. That it compares well to the 7D is most remarkable. That its IQ is almost comparable to the D3 is most remarkable.
With the recent release of the 60D, Canon won't have a good response in this category for another year or two. That gives Nikon free reign in this segment in the foreseeable future, and it will hurt Canon's bottom line (in photography).
Say what? Aside from Chase Jarvis' slightly biased photos and video floating around, and even he states his opinion is not a review, where are you getting that the IQ of the D7k is almost comparable to the D3?
Or did you mean it in a relative sense, because any digital camera is "comparable" to one another... (it's either comparatively good, or comparatively bad).
Having more features with a cheaper price tag is GOOD for everyone. One can hope/expect the trend to continue and ultimately, IF/WHEN *I* need to upgrade years from now, I will gladly pay less to have more.
A camera is a tool. If your hobby is collecting the best camera body you can afford, and not photography, and if the D7k really tickles your fancy, then get the D7k. Simple as that. Because ultimately, even if you switch and get the D7k, someone will still tell you that you should have gotten the D3s.