Nice thread - I've got a couple of sites -
http://www.chalkartstudio.com - completely managed by client and was originally 3.0.13 build of dnn and 3.5 catalook and now upgraded over time to 4.8.4 dnn and 5.7 catalook.
http://www.style.net.au - still a few quirks but used since 2005 with dnn 3.0.13 - now on compiled build of dnn with catalook - a few issues relating to client requirements, but they understand and are happy. Site is very bare, but that's what they want. Self managed using mdb updates and enjoy working with the technology.
http://www.lightsounds.com - working on updating this site - completely mac based business - so you can run a mac based environment and dnn and catalook together. Our updates will include site redesign (we didn't design this site) and, loyalyt points, referrals/affiliates section.
http://www.stationersonline.com.au - new design to be applied in next month - originally 3.0.13 dnn - will most likely upgrade to dnn 5 when it's stable, but now 4.8.4
These are not high end sites like the zonediet site or motorcylesite - both of those are very cool.
Our sites run well, are rock solid - I have to give credit to DNN and Catalook that inspite of what people think is top heavy - I can assure you it's not - when you know where to tweak and massage the product - it runs well, runs fast, day in day out. Some of these sites here are same code build for years - we've upgraded as required. This gives an excellent value for money proposition and I can't think why anyone would complain - except of course unless they didn't know enough about DNN in the first place to make it work.
DNN is an outstanding product and although I have my gripes about it - I have never lost my appreciation for what it can do, and what I think people don't understand is what the product can do and what it should be used for, therefore, box it up and compare to CMS products, when, in reality it's much more than that.
Like I said - nice thread - interesting feedback from people -
Nina Meiers