Evan,

If memory serves me correct you were burned by the Java hype a few years ago on a big project, no? I thought this had made you very cautious with DotNet.

IMHO it is all an issue of timing. I think I've said that when Linq hits the street, I'll be taking another careful look at dotNET, and at Java for that matter. I'm very sure that if I'd made the move to Java 2 years later, the "bleeding edge" issues would not have arisen. Which is the point. If you want to make a development move, "productivity" dictates that you only participate in the bleeding edge if it gives your CV or career a boost- i.e. writers, MVPs, speakers all have a vested interest in enthusiastically embacing the new, as do eager young gurus who are fortunate that their salaries are not tied to the firm's ability to earn revenue (or who have not yet drawn that connection), as does the subset of hopeless developers described by Joel who thrive on constant change as it disguises their ineptitude and gives an excuse for every failure. There are also firms and individuals out there who rely on choice of tool as a distinguishing feature of their service. For most of the rest of us, the bleeding edge is not a place you want to be. In 2006 the dotNET bleeding edge is certainly dulled, but over the course of the year you only have to think about UI and Linq to see that dotNET is still evolving towards its adult form. That's not a criticism, it's just a decision point for people who are currently productive and whose customers aren't demanding a change to dotNET, including the OP.