This is yet another article comparing a framework to a language. Aside from #2 and maybe #4, his points would be equally valid comparing Rails to Ruby without a framework. Only #4 is an argument against starting a new project using Ruby, and I think it's a bad one; programmer time is almost always orders of magnitude more valuable than machine time.

Edit: I took a look at the site in question. It's simple, fast and mostly well-designed, but the fact that it required 12k LOC and 2 months when he had the best possible functional spec (a working, but internally messy old version) doesn't give me much faith in his abilities or recommendations.