MVC 2, combined with all the advanced features of C#, is about the most productive web development framework I’ve used.

One thing that shouldn’t be over looked is Linq 2 SQL. This is a great ORM with lots of flexibility, with support for POCO’s.

My thoughts are:
1) MVC is not a RoR thing BTW, MVC was around long before RoR.
2) RoR is great for small to small-medium web projects and web apps (which means it is great for 90% of web app dev tasks, since most are of this size).
3) C# .Net is a better choice for any medium to big-iron enterprise stuff, including web apps. It eclipses RoR when it comes to enterprise power.
4) C# isn’t dynamic, but it is an amazingly powerful language. Ruby is fun, cute, with a few weird bits, but thankfully nothing like the amount of weird bits in javascript.
5) The dynamicness (if there is such a word) of RoR is partially offset by the amount of extra unit tests you have to write. A strongly typed language does give you a lot of error checking for free.
6) The weakest point of RoR is its model, ActionRecord does not have the power of say Hibernate or NHibernate. And the idea of RI being in the application is criminal, but thankfully there is a gem to solve this hole in the rails philosophy.
7) C# and .Net MVC are a powerful combination, that plus the fact that Microsoft seems to be chucking millions at it means it will be huge.
If Microsoft could make .Net MVC as easy to get into as RoR then RoR will die. But this will never happen, Microsoft tools are not easy to pick up and I don’t see this changing – they are aimed at a different market.

I’m pleased to have both tools in my programming arsenal. Each one is better in somes ways and worst in others. I will choose which one to use based on the task at hand.

-I sure wish there were an analogue to this high quality post/comments for Zend Framework, as it is an equally hacky trashy mess vs. Rails. Just because you \CAN\ do a lot of stuff with it doesn’t make it a nice system. You CAN do a lot with .NET MVC but it’s all ugly and ductaped together. It cost me an entire project that I still have to maintain on that filth.

-Considered .NET mostly because when you get use to the warm, cozy Visual Studio cave, TextMate and the like seem… well… I’ll just say VS.NET is an EXTREMELY powerful IDE that is unmatched by Netbeans/etc., and this is a point almost always lost of people who have been off MS for a long time.
-All your points are right on.
-Like a lot of MS people, I don’t care about anemic community–I got used to so many high quality printed pages, I could get whatever I needed done. It’s nice and all, but if the docs and books exist, not so important (they DONT, as MVC is new and crappy so far).

Why even post something like that? It adds nothing to the discussion. For my own part I would like to amplify the comments made by Rafael Rosa on the different philosophies behind ASP.NET MVC and Ruby on Rails. The ASP.NET MVC philosophy is one of control and customization (i.e. configuration) combined with a minimalist framework that is open to dependency injection and inversion of control (IoC). IMHO, one really must grok dependency injection and IoC to really appreciate fully the power and potential of the ASP.NET MVC framework. On the other hand, Ruby on Rails mixes what are essentially separate concerns, MVC in the UI and ORM in the data access layer, together in order to facilitate convention over configuration. This difference of opinion concerning dependency injection and IoC (which implicitly requires configuration) OR convention (which implicitly requires imiting choices) instead of configuration is really at the heart of the what makes Ruby on Rails different from ASP.NET MVC. IMHO, Ruby on Rails is easier to standardize (due to the conventions thing) BUT the flexibility and freedom offered by ASP.NET MVC with IoC and dependency injection is ultimately more powerful (albeit somewhat more demanding of advanced developer understanding).

I have just started on a .NET MVC Project after doing some Rails development last year. I have already written more code than an an equivalent Rails Project and I have just got started. However this is mainly because of the lack of the Model integration.

Still I am enjoing .NET MVC much more than Web Forms so it is a good step forward for web development using the Microsoft tools.

As othes have noted I am sure there is a lot more coming as .NET MVC evolves.

If all things were equal I would like to work on Rails however that is not an option in my work environment so .NET MVC is a great improvement for any web development I do.