OK, forgetting that the scoring is beyond lame (to their credit, they admit it) and the assigning of winners to the various categories subjective to say the least, my big question is WHY? From the comments on the site, I assume that the person who runs the site is a Mac person. Why the need to have to have such comparsion, esp. when so many things are so very subjective.
If you're going to attempt to do something like this, try to do it "right". Come up with various configs (web/email user, graphic artist, developer, corp user, etc) as well as "general" and by god put some weights in there (I'm sorry, I'm not going to base my OS decision on which one handles the num lock key better on boot). And avoid the subjective, things like intuitiveness et al. These are highly dependant on which side of the fence you came from and if either requires any training whatsoever (and almost all do), then leave it out.
I know the person says that they are trying to stimulate conversation, but when things are that fundamentally flawed, most of the conversation gets bogged down and nothing truely meaningful comes out.
I have an idea, instead of a confrontational site like X vs XP, why not come up with a site that focus's on what the "ideal" OS would have, and use X and XP as the basis (as well as things like KDE, BeOS, NeXT, etc). There are so many sucky things in both os's, fact is they both need some serious looking at in regards to functionality instead of the big push these days to simply try to make everything look pretty.
