I was referring to its terseness, simplicity, extensibility and the large ecosystem surrounding it.
I said that Django is a better framework for this reason, not your straw man reason.
Scalability is barely an issue. You can horizontally scale both frameworks virtually endlessly if you maintain application statelessness. Dick measuring contests about which company uses what and has the most pageviews do not contribute much to the discussion. Are you going to argue that PHP is a good language because Facebook has a billion users?
I was referring to its terseness, simplicity, extensibility and the large ecosystem surrounding it. I said that Django is a better framework for this reason, not your straw man reason.
You're going to have to link me to the comment where you "referred to" and "said" all of that, because this was all I saw:
Where's the Django for .NET? and Does the same sort of thing, but is not nearly as good.
So maybe I got foolishly got myself into this by bothering to respond to two zero-effort comments. It wasn't a dick measuring contest, the point of the exercise was to examine that a .NET stack (including ASP.NET MVC at its core) can be executed upon with finesse and tuned to efficiency at high operational capacity. Futhermore, other frameworks (i.e. Django) aren't short of their own troubles.
I said that Django is a better framework for this reason, not your straw man reason.
Scalability is barely an issue. You can horizontally scale both frameworks virtually endlessly if you maintain application statelessness. Dick measuring contests about which company uses what and has the most pageviews do not contribute much to the discussion. Are you going to argue that PHP is a good language because Facebook has a billion users?