At the risk of talking to a wall ... give me a break.

Ruby's a very nice language. Rail's an amazing framework.

But. They are neither dominant nor even close to universally
appropriate. They have things they do well, and they have things
they don't do well, and they have things they don't do at all.
And they have design foci which make them appropriate for some
tasks, and not appropriate for others.

All of which should be completely obvious.

Here's the sermon: Pretending that decisions you don't understand
were made entirely for political reasons, or because the people making
the decision are stupid, is a sure-fire way to prevent yourself from
ever learning anything. Instead of indulging in free-form bile, why
not ask "What would have to be true for that to be the right decision?"

You'd be surprised how much insight such a simple question can
generate.


William Grosso




Chad Perrin wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 03, 2006 at 07:15:32AM +0900, Alvin Ryder wrote:
>> As for developing major sites with Rails, most managers don't have the
>> balls. They'd rather pay millions to get a java solution, it isn't
>> their money on the budget so they gutlessly pour it down the java hole
>> and hope for the best. If the project fails they blame the team or
>> throw more money and bodies at the problem, of course it's not java's
>> fault or theirs.
>>
>> Anyway I don't hold prejedice again java or c# but they are in no way a
>> safe bet.
> 
> Sure it is.  You'll (almost) never have to fear for your job based on a
> decision to go with Java or a Microsoft "solution", even if it is
> entirely the WRONG decision.  You could cost the company millions, end
> up getting dozens of people laid off, and tank the entire project, but
> if the language by which you did so is Java or C# you may still have job
> security (as long as you haven't made other high-profile bad decisions).
> The problem with job security in that circumstance only really arises if
> there was a bitter power struggle over whether to go with Java or .NET,
> and your side "won", then the project tanked at a cost of millions.  The
> opposing "side" might just blame the language/framework decision.
> 
> On the flipside, even where from a technical standpoint it's almost
> impossible to avoid thinking something like Ruby on Rails, or Perl's
> Catalyst, or Python's Django, is the best option, you may well find
> yourself losing a job even if you made the right decision and the
> project was well on its way to being a howling success.  All it takes is
> a poorly-timed change in management structure, and they may junk all the
> work that has already been done at a cost of millions to rewrite
> everything in Java or C# (or, God forbid, VB.NET), and fire you and all
> your buddies for doing great work very quickly in the "wrong" language.
> 
> Corporate politics.  Whee.
>