On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 04:35:49AM +0900, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
> Phlip wrote:
> > Joel Spolsky wrote:
> > 
> >> [Ruby is slow] so if you become The Next MySpace,
> >> you'll be buying 5 times as many boxes as the .NET guy
> >> down the hall.
> > 
> > Last time I checked, 5 new boxes were cheaper than 5 new programmers...
> > 
> 
> That isn't the point.
> 
> 1. Five new experienced .NET programmers are cheaper than five new
> experienced Rails programmers.
> 2. One new box is cheaper than five new boxes.
> 
> Now: would you like to debate whether a Rails programmer can produce at
> five times the rate of a .NET programmer, given equivalent tools and
> processes? Or would you like to join me in efforts and advocacy to speed
> Ruby up, which seems to me a more productive use of time?

If you're going to debate the scale of productivity increase for web
development gained with Rails, perhaps you should also debate these
mythic software performance gains for .NET over Rails.  I, frankly, am
not convinced .NET grants any notable performance benefit over Rails on
average, at all.  I'm more convinced of productivity gains for Rails
programmers over .NET programmers, however.

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
Ben Franklin: "As we enjoy great Advantages from the Inventions of
others we should be glad of an Opportunity to serve others by any
Invention of ours, and this we should do freely and generously."