NO gun should be purchased based off of what someone said. Period. You should take all of the information you can (specs, personal opinions you get elsewhere, etc), and narrow down your list. THEN, you should borrow/rent/do whatever to get the different finalists into your hands at a range and squeeze off some rounds. THEN you should make your decision.
I did all of the research in the world possible for my wife’s Christmas present. Listened to opinions, looked at wound ballistics, etc. Narrowed my field down to an M & P or a Glock. Rented both, found out that my wife, although an incredibly awesome shot, couldn’t get a good grip with her tiny fingers and limp wristed them both terribly. Had I gone off of opinion and bought either, she would have a really expensive bludgeoning weapon. Now she rocks a little .357 revolver that doesn’t have that problem.
Moral of the story: you need to actually put some time in at the range. Hold all of the guns you are thinking of buying. Does your hand fit? Can you reach the mag release? Do you like the safety location? Do you like the weight? Do you like the sights? There’s only one way to find these things out: hold the gun and pull the trigger with live ammo in it.
Trust me on this one like you life depends on it. Because it very well could.
Yes, I've narrowed the field down to a pistol over a revolver. (personal preference) Yes I've narrowed it down to a mid-sized frame based on preference when firing. I can't see carrying a full-size and I hate the way the subcompacts feel in my hand - all of them. Sure they may be easier to carry, but if they are miserable to fire at the range, that takes a lot of the fun out of the sport as well as means I'll probably practice less, which isn't a good thing. I'd rather carry and rely on a weapon I'm comfortable with, even if it means adapting to a little more bulk.
Besides real range time/firing I've held and dry fired just about every semi-auto in three different local shops. I narrowed it down to the two I mentioned based on feel in my hand, reputation of the manufacturer, combination of features. What I was looking for here was (were?) the anecdotes, the personal experiences (first or second hand) such as the jams, trigger issues, magazine problems, ammo sensitivity, nooks and crannies that are hard to clean, etc.
You see, my theory is, if you go on the net and look around at reviews what you're going to see are both ends of the bell curve. Those people that care enough to post a review are going to either be fanboys that think manufacturer X can do no wrong. Or people that had a bad experience and hate Y with a passion. In general, these kinds of reviews are biased and not that useful. They're only useful if they occur a lot - indicating a real problem or a really good product that a lot of people fall in love with. Every product is going to have it's irrational fanboys and detractors. Those kinds of reviews are only useful in a statistical sense. What I'm more interested in are the experiences in the middle of the bell curve - what are they like to live with day by day.