1. I think adding faux-classes in JavaScript is pretty nasty, and is a fundamental design choice in jQuery. The fact it doesn't have it is a good thing in my ey

1. I think adding faux-classes in JavaScript is pretty nasty, and is a fundamental design choice in jQuery. The fact it doesn't have it is a good thing in my eyes. I simply don't understand what you mean by "jQuery's SQL-like syntax" at all, but it's probably a matter of taste. 2. I think jQuery smells, feels and tastes like regular JavaScript, but I guess it's a matter of opinion. Even if you don't consider it "regular JavaScript" it's undeniably simple to read. 3. Speed is debatable, but in either case, they're quick enough not to matter which is what you need. 4. This is available in jQuery UI and was formerly known as the Easing plugin. I'm not convinced it's the sort of thing that should be in jQuery core since it's used by a minority of people. 5. $("<a />").attr("href", "http://juliocapote.com http://juliocapote.com"); 6. jQuery is only 15kb for the whole thing - 15kb is nothing these days. jQuery contains very little unnecessary bloat anyway, and the bigger jQuery UI lets you choose which modules you want. 7. jQuery's documentation in general is excellent. 8. I don't know enough about jQuery plugins to answer this question - I've had a quick glance at the docs and it looks simple enough so I don't really understand the criticism. 9. It's a matter of taste, but one of the reasons that jQuery caught on so much is because it took a namespace-based approach that doesn't coillide with anything else now or in the future (this has been an issue with Prototype) - this allows you to use jQuery in existing code safe in the knowledge that it won't clobber anything else. There's one other core advantage to jQuery's namespace - you always know where to look in the documentation, plus if something changes you can easily identify which bits are what. I think namespaces are a good idea. 10. I don't understand what you mean by this. People have rallied around jQuery because it avoids cloberring anything else so can be used in all projects, solely makes up for the gaps in jQuery, and is fast and small and has good documentation. There's no conspiracy - it's become popular because it's good. Everyone has their favourite, but I've looked through all the libraries recently and decided jQuery seems to be the nicest in general. I personally think MooTools feels dated - it seems to be designed to be a prettier Prototype and despite succeeding at that goal other libraries seem better.