Indeed, using Drupal can turn into module hell. However, we are not only using Drupal for the sole benefit of being able to quick-start a website.

Take a look at this site: Butterflive: live chat and real-time tracking

The front-office part is done with Drupal and the backoffice in Drupal + Mouf. Why did we do it this way?

Well the front-office is very efficient because we have a bunch of static pages to edit. I am a developer, but my colleagues are not. They are pretty happy to use Drupal to edit the static pages of the site. When it comes the back-office part (when you subscribe on the website), everything is coded using Mouf, in a nice object-oriented MCV way. I could have used a framework like Symfony for the back-office, however, I would have had to make a template for Drupal AND Symfony, I would have had to configure Google Analytics for Drupal AND Symfony, and so on...

So in my opinion, Drupal is a valid choice as a platform if you need to develop an application that comes with a lot of static content. Of course, if your application has no "front-office" part, you are better using a "pure" framework.

Actually, when looking for a framework, having a look at Drupal is not that stupid. I must admit I have a love-hate relationship with Drupal. It comes with a set of restrictions, but you have a website out-of-the-box to start quickly: a nice templating engine, an easy way to add static pages, a way to manage users... and it has several thousands available module to easily add functionalities, which is unprecedented

Now, in my opinion, the real problem with Drupal is that it does not rely on the MVC pattern, and most developers are used to that. Also, it is not object-oriented!

At my place, we have developed an MVC framework that we can plug to Drupal. This way, we get the benefit of Drupal and all its modules, and when it comes to pure PHP development, we have a nice MVC framework instead of those bloody Drupal hooks. If you want to have a look:

• The Mouf framework
• The MVC module
• Drupal integration

It is released as open-source, it is functional, but documentation is not complete yet so I would not recommend using it until we finish the documentation (probably in January).

Same thing here in France. Thanks to the new almighty 3-strikes and your out law. This law does not punish the people who download, but the owner of the connexion through which the download was performed... As a result, impossible to share my wifi anymore.... and that's a real shame because we loose the spirit of openness of the early internet days.... The winners? Internet providers of course! You cannot share your connexion with your neighbours anymore!

Well, here in France, the "open-office firewall" is becoming a real meme. And here is the source: http://www.numerama.com/magazine/12508-albanel-le-ministere-de-la-culture-a-comme-pare-feu-open-office-maj.html You can even see the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ph6ZeEDnFmc Both links are in French, but Google Translate will help you :) To be fair, it's been 1 year since this ministry has been replaced, but it is unsure the one in place knows any better about IT.

Actually, exposing it in Javascript is not new. Some online services are already doing it (For instance: Apideo). However, it is nice to see WebM coming to live streaming. Most of the problems with current technology based on Flash is that Flash live streaming does only support VP6, which is an old codec with very poor quality and high bandwidth consumption.
My guess is a nice codec matching the quality of Skype, right in the browser, might help a wide adoption of live camera streaming.