I'm still learning django and im very new to web programming. I read that PDF and it looks interesting, but i didn't found any reasons to switch to web2py. Some of the things django lacked could be done in a simple script i guess, but that may be my inexperience kicking in and me not knowing it can't be done(at least not easily). But what's more interesting to me is that if we count points in this document Django beats Rails. And although i don't know any ruby or rails i don't think that its much worse than django. So i don't think that this pdf should be taken too seriously. But im really new to this, until 3 days ago i didn't know what MVC was, so i should not be taken seriously either.
Here are a few things that you can do with web2py but not Django: upload/download streaming (as in deal with files larger than fit in ram), connect to multiple database, use pure python in templates, give tickets to visitors on error, develop and maintain your web sites via a web interface, run the ORM in Google App Engine. There are also many apps you can get here http://mdp.cti.depaul.edu/appliances
Even without much experience with some of the frameworks on the list, I was blown away by how blatantly biased some of those comparisons were. (No, the disclaimer on the first page warning of "possible" biases doesn't cut it).
It is biased since I made it but I have emailed people I know from other frameworks and I have incorporated all the corrections that they have sent me.
hm... it looks like all criteria were chosen right for web2py. By the way php is not a framework, so comparison is inaccurate here.
However web2py look pretty interesting, I think I will definitely give it a try.
If you have questions you gave a very active users group: groups.google.com/group/web2py