Ruby on Rails is tempting me. It sounds really amazing. Like .net 2.0, but more sensible.
I just wrote a simple CMS in PHP5, which was nice but there was a lot of leg work to build the back end. We are writing an ASP.NET cms at work, which is very quick at first but once you leave the realm of “things that microsoft thought of” it becomes very, very difficult. I also wonder about the sensibilty of using an event-driven model for a web application framework. To me it seems to be TOO abstract. The idea of a framework is to provide a certain level of abstraction, but the event-driven model provides you with a development view that does not reflect the reality of what happens in the HTTP world. HTTP applications, by their nature, are stateless. Every action can be seen as a server request, and then a server response. The MVC pattern makes sense to me in this regard, because you still build an application by creating responses to requests.
ASP.net creates a metaphor that is more user-centric. You develop your app as the user might think of it, rather than how it works. Click on a button, something happens. The requests and responses are still there, but they all happen down in the code-generation world of the framework. It works, and it is very quick to develop, but it just does not reflect what is happening. Which bugs me.