Re: Joel Spolsky on languages for web programming

Phlip,

When I mentioned the error in reasoning Joel did, by equating almost
all his infamous post about Ruby, basically with FEAR, some people did
not fully get my point.

Then you added the UNCERTAINTY and DOUBT that was there too, to create
the trifecta of a technology attack based on truly nothing significant
at all.

Well, guess who aggreed with us, almost point by point? David
Heinemeier, co-founder and lead developer of Ruby on Rails, check out
his post here:

http://www.loudthinking.com/arc/000596.html

Have a nice weekend everyone,

Jose L. Hurtado
Web Developer
Toronto, Canada


Phlip wrote:
Joseph wrote:

Although I respect Joel very much, I believe he makes a fundamental
mistake in his reasoning.

Joel is such a good writer that sometimes his jaw-drooping errors are
impossible to refute. (And don't encourage him; he loves it when you fight
back!)

Basically what he is saying can be deconstructed this way:

* Do not risk developing in new cutting edge technology. Even if
successful proof of concepts are already out there (37 signals et. al)
* Use what most people use: PHP / J2EE / .Net not what most experts
tell you to use. Communities and support are paramount.

The open source tools that succeed must have higher technical quality than
the Daddy Warbucks tools. The latter can afford to buy their communities and
"support" networks. Because an open source initiative cannot buy its
community and marketing, only the strong survive, and their early adopters
will form this community spontaneously. They will provide the true
word-of-mouth advertising that marketing tends to simulate.

And I am sick and tired of seeing at shops dragged down by some idiotic
language choice made between the marketeers and a computer-illiterate
executive.

* Corporations and the people in those organizations favor safety, if
your job is on the line go with the tried and true. Take no risks.

Ah, so looking like you are following best practices is more important than
doing everything you can to ensure success. Gotcha!

Yes, I have seen that upclose, too!

All three assumptions rely on a single assumption: FEAR.

* Fear the technology would eventually not deliver.
* Fear the support will not be sufficient.
* Fear regarding your job safety as a corporate developer or manager
who chooses Ruby or Ruby on Rails for some mission critical project.

Yup - that's the Fear Uncertainty and Doubt formula that Microsoft (among
others) use all the time. They have tried, over and over again, to FUD
Linux. Their CEO will get up on stage and say incredibly stupid things, like
"if an open source platform fails you, there is nobody you can go to for
help!" He means there's nobody you can sue. As if you could go to MS for
help, without paying thru the nose...

Oh, Joel is pro-Linux, right? What's the difference??

All assumptions are wrong.

Better, fear that your boss will experience misguided fear.

--
Phlip
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!!

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Joel Spolsky on languages for web programming
    ... Communities and support are paramount. ... word-of-mouth advertising that marketing tends to simulate. ... Fear the technology would eventually not deliver. ... Oh, Joel is pro-Linux, right? ...
    (comp.lang.ruby)
  • Re: Ideas on "Why Living Dangerous can be A Good Thing" in Ruby?
    ... The fear in part has to do with type checking. ... essential to 'safe' programming. ... I personally have never crashed my computer using Ruby. ... just removing the type checking and other 'security' measures. ...
    (comp.lang.ruby)
  • Re: Joel Spolsky on languages for web programming
    ... All three assumptions rely on a single assumption: FEAR. ... who chooses Ruby or Ruby on Rails for some mission critical project. ... nor corporations who thing like he does will ... he has right to trust himself than me. ...
    (comp.lang.ruby)
  • Re: DateTime irrationality
    ... I have a few astro related projects I'm working on. ... Ruby but I fear it might be a little slow compared to others in some of ... it's a can of worms I haven't dared open yet (based primarily on the ... with ruby;-) ...
    (comp.lang.ruby)
  • Re: is haskell more productive than scheme?
    ... But I'm not giving in an inch to fear ... I feel like I owe it...to someone. ...
    (comp.lang.functional)