Stephen Kellett wrote:
> Doesn't mention Ruby directly but does talk about whats hip (LAMP which 
> I guess means we can include Ruby).

Nope.  At least not when I see the acronym used.

Rarely have I seen a LAMP discussion that bothers to explain that one 
might also consider coding with a non-P* language, or using Postgres, or 
running under Lighttp, for example.

Which is a shame; technology selection by acronym is probably not an 
enlightened decision procedure ('LAMP Considered Harmful').

But, as AJAX has shown, many people prefer to gulp down a buzzword than 
digest a full plate of technical details.


> 
> http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/dec2005/tc20051213_042973.
> htm

It made me think of a phrase from earlier times:

"Java is the COBOL of the '90s"

James

-- 

http://www.ruby-doc.org       - Ruby Help & Documentation
http://www.artima.com/rubycs/ - Ruby Code & Style: Writers wanted
http://www.rubystuff.com      - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
http://www.jamesbritt.com     - Playing with Better Toys
http://www.30secondrule.com   - Building Better Tools