Fair enough. So was your point that ASP.NET is "old technology" if it isn't used with the MVC architecture?

I don't have numbers on this but my guess is there is still lots of non-MVC ASP.NET work going on. Probably even a large majority of it. You are unusually plugged in to the most current Microsoft directions, more so than most developers and certainly more so than most shops. I don't have to tell you that corporate shops tend to adopt new technology cautiously. The soup du jour is about the last thing on the menu most of them want to order. In my experience, anyway.

>WCF isn't a product. ASP.NET Web Services isn't a product. ADO.NET data sets are products. LINQ2SQL is not a product. Yet, in those last two cases, there is movement to use Entity Framework instead. And it isn't a product either.
>
>>But MVC is not a successor or alternative to ASP.NET. It is the MVC architecture/pattern applied to ASP.NET, not a product. You can't go out and buy MVC. I am not knocking it, at all -- it seems like a great approach -- just distinguishing it from a product, which remains ASP.NET.