Ok, i have used both in both open social environments and large corporate websites. // // ==MooTools== -very simple, very light, almost minimalistic -the c

Ok, i have used both in both open social environments and large corporate websites. // // ==MooTools== -very simple, very light, almost minimalistic -the community is more on the "creative" and "artist" side of things, the site just looks well designed -Mootools becomes unmanageable in a mixed framework enviroment // // ==jQuery== -great for the medium sized website -unobtrusive, allows you to rename the jQuery object -architecturally simpler, but highly abstracted --does not map to native javascript, so its a ton of work to pull jQuery out of your JS. -HUGE community -hundreds of Plugins -has inside influence with Mozilla, Webkit, and now IE -documentation wiki, when something is broke, anyone can fix it. // // ==reasons to use neither== -framework lifecycles are hard to manage right now --websites with thousands of lines of code can be hard to upgrade to new versions -developers need to learn Javascript 1st and then the Framework -Caja breaks most frameworks -Half of Opensocial users are on Caja containers -debugging can be easier on native code. // // there are things i love about both frameworks and i would recommend either of them to different people, but i think any JavaScript 'rockstar' will need to know all of the frameworks and why one is better than the other. personally i don't like prototype (sorry), but the namespace is bloated. Why do i have a different interface for css selectors and element ids, jQuery Gets this WAY right. i am finding that i don't like attaching framework objects to element IDs, it forces you to have ids on everything which should all be unique. i am still deciding if css classes make more sense, or maybe a custom attribute makes more sense. the downside to this would be performance. ids are hashed, vs attributes are not.