Bottom line is that MM.Net has a solid architecture. Though I went through the StrataFrame trial, the thing I had to ask myself was - is it really worth it to go through yet another learning curve. And what to do about my "legacy" applcations that are now in production? Sure, it would be nice to have a ORM/DAL/BOL/whatever to help speed up the creation of business objects :) and I'm sure Kevin is doing everything he can to get that out. I was smittened by a little envy there when I saw the StrataFrame product ship with a similar tool. But, overall I have to say my experience with MM.Net has been very good. Last year I was able to turn out 4 complete enterprise class web applications for 4 different clients with good success.

Ciao,
Carl.


>Fair enough, Carl. Thank you for the response.
>
>I took a new job a few months back (more money, better title, more pleasant work environment, and much closer to home now) and about a month ago, I finally got past some of the legacy "issues" and started new .NET development again. Since my new company didn't have a framework, and I'm most familiar with MM.Net it made sense to start the new development with that framework. When Gary said that StrataFrame was "several orders of magnitude" better than MM.Net it made me curious to find out more, since I've never heard that sort of statement applied in any context to any of MM's products. I may need to download and check it out.
>
>Thanks again,
>---J
>
>>Jason, I have to admit my experience with it is very superficial. I suppose it was a more subjective thingy on my part. As much as I would like to, I do very little WinForms stuff - mostly ASP.NET. Visually, StrataFrame forms did look better to me whereas MM.Net has a clunky look. Of course, looks aren't everything :)