Here's my first ever internet prediction: at some point in time, perhaps sooner than any of us think, the M&P will surpass the Glock as the police pistol of choice. And, if the .45 is as slim through the grip as has been reported, we will see that caliber emerge as the caliber of choice for LEOs.
Here's my basis for these statements: S&W has addressed every flaw the Glock has i.e., the grip angle, having to complete a trigger press for field stripping (this has been a regular source of ND's), grip size, left-handed users/ambidextrous, fully-supported chamber, the ability to shoot lead (although who would want to), and overall ergonomics. Two things yet to be seen are whether S&W will provide the same high level of support as Glock and the long-term durability of the M&P design.
Now, for the caliber. If the .45 is sized anywhere near or below the grip size of a Glock 22, why would agencies stay with the .40? Recoil is arguably more tame in the .45 and most agree that a .45 is the better fight stopper. Magazine capacity would be somewhat reduced which, as Jeff Cooper has stated, is important if you plan on missing a lot.
Granted, S&W has a long row to hoe, but it appears they have fielded a great product. If nothing else, Glock is going to have to be a bit more responsive to customer input (such as requests for a full-sized single stack .45 - which I have read is in the works).
Disclaimer: I have a Glock 22 which works fine for me. And Glocks are fine as far as they go. The preceding statements are my opinion based on a fair amount of experience with firearms. YMMV.
Here's my basis for these statements: S&W has addressed every flaw the Glock has i.e., the grip angle, having to complete a trigger press for field stripping (this has been a regular source of ND's), grip size, left-handed users/ambidextrous, fully-supported chamber, the ability to shoot lead (although who would want to), and overall ergonomics. Two things yet to be seen are whether S&W will provide the same high level of support as Glock and the long-term durability of the M&P design.
Now, for the caliber. If the .45 is sized anywhere near or below the grip size of a Glock 22, why would agencies stay with the .40? Recoil is arguably more tame in the .45 and most agree that a .45 is the better fight stopper. Magazine capacity would be somewhat reduced which, as Jeff Cooper has stated, is important if you plan on missing a lot.

Granted, S&W has a long row to hoe, but it appears they have fielded a great product. If nothing else, Glock is going to have to be a bit more responsive to customer input (such as requests for a full-sized single stack .45 - which I have read is in the works).
Disclaimer: I have a Glock 22 which works fine for me. And Glocks are fine as far as they go. The preceding statements are my opinion based on a fair amount of experience with firearms. YMMV.