"Bait" and switch()?

Good stuff.

Maybe I'm cheap, but $750 seems steep for that.

Best. News. Ever.

That's awesome.

All the hype about this is FUD:

http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/google-chrome-license-agreement/

An unlimited number of standards compliant browsers would be no big deal. Right now, if you develop for FireFox, Safari, or Opera first, you rarely need to make any changes for the others to work. IE is all that causes cross browser compatibility to be so painful. Chrome shouldn't have any negative impact on the situation (and potentially great positive improvements).

That doesn't use jQuery. It uses Prototype and Scriptaculous (optionally).

EF is in this, yes.

I used to use Dreamweaver to lay things out back in the days of table layouts, and then would bring that HTML into Visual Studio.

However, I find them more of a hindrance than help when working on CSS layouts. There's so little HTML in a good CSS layout and it makes enough sense visually, designer tools simply become leaky abstractions.

JIT'ing the managed code before comparing execution speeds seems to defeat the point of comparing them at all.

It's a work in progress, but I think it's turning out pretty decent. The most direct link is: http://encosia.com/downloads/postback-ritalin/

Thanks for submitting it, shashisatya.

I wouldn't use that in a project with a team consisting of more than myself.

There's useful background info in the Ajaxian post, but if you aren't interested in that; this is the direct link to Google's info on the project: http://code.google.com/apis/ajaxlibs/

In my experience, if you can't write maintainable ASP.NET applications, that's not the fault of the framework. It may often tempt you to make poor design decisions, but it doesn't force you to.

The price is up to $27.49 now. Still not bad though.