Actually, I agree with Jeff's post. Sure we have extracted out all the code from the page behind and now we can test our application. But the cost is too high. Now, we have to do everything on our own. Our code behind is clean but guess what our view is freaking ugly. What we don't realize is that the real power of the ASP.NET framework are the controls. You remove the ASP.NET controls and you are left with nothing.

Rob, you wrote so much code just to achieve paging. How about you implement the GridView in-place editing now. Let's see how much code you end up writing?

I am not saying that ASP.NET MVC is BS. I am just saying it won't work when your view is really complicated.

One of the other things that we need to realize is that the MVC Rails framework (default rails framework) is not so popular because of the the MVC implementation. It is popular because of the Ruby language. Ruby is a very concise language which makes things happen quickly.

Using ASP.NET MVC seems like I have transported myself 10 years back to the days of classic ASP."

The one thing this comment leaves out is the part about "Hey, I run or link to a site called GridViewGuy, so I am aware I have some vested interests in the technologies I've spent time with" but that's okay...I'm sure it was impartial!  And to be fair, given:

• that I am using the MVC with success on not one but *three* large-scale projects
• My past posting history

It would seem that I have my own biases, were it not for the fact that my impartiality is beyond reproach.

  I have almost recovered from the surgery I required when I nearly bit my tongue *off* after reading the comments on Kyle Baley's post in a similar vein.  Thus, once my move to paradise on Earth has been completed, I assure you we'll be talking quite a *bit* more about the MVC...