I went backwards. I've owned most of the albums (up through Let's Dance) at one time or another, but I've narrowed it down to just Rise and Fall of Ziggy... and Singles 69-92.
for completists, it nice if a GH has single edits in addition to your albums with album length versions. I prefer having both if possible. With newer music, its less an issue, since singles are not really a market anymore.
That album is great. The original packaging is also cool (the fold-open version). Eventually they went econo and released the LP with just copies of the original front and back.
On GH: usually not a good idea for an album-oriented artist. Some of these collections work better than others such as the Pretenders Singles. But you could argue that even though they put out fine albums (esp. Learning to Crawl), their strength is singles.
But even GH collections that work seem to leave off at least one song you think has to be there. Such as on the Pretenders Singles no "Ohio" (with its awesome line "Muzak filed the air/ From Seneca to Cuyahoga Falls"). They could have left out "My Baby" or "Hymn to Her." Those songs suck. "Ohio" rocks.
Finally, GH can fill an important function with bands that have released several non-album singles (songs used in movies, e.g.). An example par excellance: The Cure, Staring at the Sea.
That was my thinking when I started my CD collection some 17 years ago. After acquiring all the greatest hits CDs from various artists I have concentrated more on "original" albums.
Of course, there are exceptions. Like we discussed earlier, a Pink Floyd GH is silly. Some artists have a couple of great albums, but only scattered gems among the rest of their work. For example, I couldn't live without Quadrophrenia, Tommy, or Live at Leeds, but I don't mind using The Who Ultimate Collection to fill in the gaps.
Today I replaced about 10 Curtis Mayfield albums with the People Get Ready boxset (couldn't bear to part with Live! or Superfly). I love Curtis, but most of his albums are loaded with filler.