Being serious, I saw the beta in action a lot and I did like the performance of it. What ended up in the final layout is a bit strange but there you go. It'll evolve. I won't be buying it though.
Whatever you say about windows people will say the same things. Much of the time it depends on the timings of launch, length until replacements and computer advancements during that time. XP was not regarded as superduper reliable when it launched at all, that was a total myth. It acquired this status for the simple reason that the length between XP and Vista was so vast that it had various service packs and development and it coincided with very dramatic CPU advancements and a few other things. Vista was worse than XP but it got a lot of its reputation because imbeciles were putting it in machines there weren't really ideal to run it. Now some of that is microsoft's fault but some of it is the idiots that built these machines and packaged them deliberately knowing how bad they'd be.