If we're looking purely at first team results, then you might have a point. With one exception, Warnock's team have not produced anything that could be called entertaining yet, but he's got the excuse that he inherited a team in the bottom three that was shaping up for a season long battle against the drop - what was Slade's excuse for the boring football his sides produced for two seasons? I say one exception because the Huddersfield match was a good game of football that was only equalled during Slade's time by the match with Brighton where I'm still trying to work out which of the two teams had been nobbled - maybe they both were?
Let's face it, Slade never did anything to suggest that he was interested in what was happening below first team level, whereas Warnock is attempting to shake up an Academy/Development team system which stagnated so much under our Russell. Also, Warnock's only been here about seven weeks and he's already met fans at Cardiff City Stadium, Pontypridd and Maesteg as well as paying a goodwill visit to that a company near Merthyr I believe it was, he's putting Slade (who, as far as I can recall, had just the one meeting with fans in two years) to shame in that department.
Don't judge all Slade critics by the same standards, I was supportive of him when he first arrived and defended him against those who, wrongly in my view, were against him from day one, but, after about six weeks or so, it became clear that all he could offer was a holding operation.
If a manager was only assessed on first team results, then Slade could be said to have done a decent job in testing circumstances, but there's more to it than that and he was either out of his depth or wasn't bothered about things like youth development (he's the worst Cardiff manager I've seen as far as that goes) or being an ambassador for the club - put that together with a transfer record which was mixed at best and it's clear that Warnock is as much in a different league to Slade as the two men's managerial record would suggest.