DAW compare site

Sites like that are just excuses for ads. They do nothing but compare published features, often doing so poorly, as you mentioned. What would be far more useful, but would require actual work and skill to accomplish, would be to nominate a recording/mixing/mastering project and use the DAWs under comparison to complete each song, start to finish. I think something like that would give you a great deal more useful information to base a selection decision on.

Beagle rates his DAW's by the chew test. 

I liked to use human test subjects. I'd talk with DAW users about the things they loved, hated, and what drove them crazy about their DAW. Rather than compare one against the other, I figured they each had some pros and cons and it was a matter of selecting which one had the pros I wanted and the cons I could tolerate. I watched a friend of mine torture himself endlessly trying to use Cubase, so I knew I didn't want to go down that road. His workarounds got in the way of his production and wasted tremendous amounts of time. Macs were too expensive for me, so products based on that platform were off my list. I went through a number of people before I decided I had enough information. When I go to Sonar, I felt that it had the features and capabilities I wanted without the dongle/stability issues of Cubase. For me, it was the right solution. I haven't regretted it. 

Heh Heh, Beagle said skew.
 
Oh, I thought there was an 'r' in there. My bad. 

I bought the non-commercial Reaper because I was intrigued by the idea that a track was anything you wanted it to be (including a bus). That was about the extent of my using it. I could not get behind their paradigm.
 
I bought into Studio One because of sales. I like the look but I had some troubles with MIDI that I did not want to spend more than an hour on. I have not upgraded to V3. Probably won't.
 
I bought Harrison Mixbus as a mastering environment. Stopped using the 32bit version when certain 32bit plugins didn't behave. Waited on Mixbus 3. Bought it. Have only played with it for about an hour. Waiting 3.1 when ASIO support is better as well as better VST support.
 
Pro Tools has zero allure to me.
 

BUbba has the right of it.
 
I doan read. I post.

Hi,
 
What's the point? They all do the same thing!
 
And that magazine still doesn't know how to help folks do something with them! That's why they use different utilities to make their own sound and music ... using a DAW is almost ... well. maybe I'll learn someday! Sonar was not any easier than Abelton, in fact it was harder and the installation was worse!

batsbrew
DAW's are a dime a dozen.
 
just pick one, and get busy.

Woodyoflop
I've looked at quite a few DAw compare sites to determine which DAWs i buy, but most of them seem to be misinformed on alot of capabilities. I like usuing multiple daws however Sonar is my favorite. 
Take a look at 
 
http://sound-editing.softwareinsider.com/compare/53-68/Avid-Pro-Tools-vs-Cakewalk-Sonar-X3
 
What do yall think on the subject? its not just Sonar that they have misinformation on, it seems to be a normal thing and always biased towards a side.
 
Just irritates me because it makes some of the good Daws look bad when they really arent.

Isn't the page you're citing just comparing Audio Editing? As in:
 
Home › Audio Editing › Compare

 
from the top of the page.
 
It's why Audacity is compared to Sonar, ProTools, and whatever DAW one wants to compare.  Anche nota bene: Audacity is sponsored.  It does look weirdly biased, however, even with this caveat.  And the "Prosumer" (as opposed to "High End") rating of Sonar X3 is bewildering.