So, I've tried Ubuntu 9.04 on my laptop. I hadn't much time for this yet, but I can confirm that the Intel-based graphics are fine now, including wobbly, transparent windows and Expose-like effects.
I didn't see lots of other differences, just an overhauled desktop theme (using KDE here), login manager, and the like. The more invisible changes under the hood (Upstart instead of SysV init, more recent Linux kernel, whatever else) do not cause any trouble for me. Everything just works, but more smoothly thanks to the new graphics driver.
Basically, just what I expected.
Now, let's join the distribution/desktop environment/OS war... (which was foreseeable, right?)
Let's start this way: my first Linux distribution was SuSE 5.x (maybe 5.1 or 5.2, with FVWM2). That was after a few years of agony with DOS and Win95 that had followed a much better time on Amiga OS; and I was very impressed back then, having an awesome command line AND a usable graphical environment again.
I was not so impressed about the funny configuration tool and package manager in SuSE, so I switched over to Debian about a year later. I would not have ditched Debian if their release cycles for the stable version would have been a bit shorter. Their stable versions featured, sometimes severly, outdated program versions, so I had the choice between Debian Unstable, or compiling all programs I wanted newer versions from by myself. So I chose the latter, but also killed my Debian installation in favor of Rock Linux.
Rock Linux was OK for learning how a Linux distribution really works. Starting with a small base system, I built everything from scratch--very time consuming, but probably worth the experience. I also learned that package managers are a great thing to have... If some of you also would like to learn these things, I guess you should try LFS, Gentoo, Arch, or Slackware today. Use a virtual machine or old PC so not to break anything, though.
I also tried different window managers, but most of the time it was Window Maker.
At some point, I decided that I should not spend so much time working on maintaining my working environment, but rather work with an environment that someone else maintains for me... Fortunately, Ubuntu 5.04 had just been released then. It was considered "the better Debian" since it used the same awesome package management system, but came with regular release cycles and thus more recent software, so I gave it a try. Gnome was not exactly what I wanted then, and I started using IceWM, later switched to KDE (because I like a lot of options to play around with
).
I still like Ubuntu for desktop PCs. Ubuntu does many things The Right Way, IMHO; at least, the good things (easy installation and upgrades, reasonably up-to-date software packages, stable) outweigh the bad things (shipping with unusable KDE 4.1 in 8.10 or bad graphics drivers in 9.04), especially since you can always work around problems. I don't use Ubuntu on my file server, though. I like Debian for that task a lot more because of the same reason I ditched it on the desktop: long release cycles, thus great stability.
The point of posting the whole story of my life here is that I think that the statement "my Linux distro is better than yours" (or window manager/desktop environment) is invalid. In the end, it's just the Linux kernel with a lot of free software around it, and each distribution has its own target audience with specific needs. No need to fight, I say.
I've heard of people liking Linux, but I don't use it since most of my software is not compatible with it.
That's not exactly a good point for, say, Windows. If some software requires you to use a specific operating system, then you are tied to the OS vendor. If you like bondage, this might be right for you, but I prefer a free choice.
Also: I've heard of people liking Windows, but I don't use it since most of my software is not compatible with it. :wink: (oops, bigpook said this already)
Well, at least I could get Windows versions for many of the programs that I use regularly if I really wanted to, so it's not exactly "most" of my software...
I would jump on Linux permanently if there was a native version of MS Office.
I guess you've tried OpenOffice.org already... Did you try installing Windows in VirtualBox and using MS Office there?