Programmer, humorist. Host of the Citizen Coder Podcast. I interview developers from all over the world, from beginners trying to break into the industry to senior devs.
I find it particularly interesting that the critics of rails leave off basecamp, hey, and many other big pieces of software that are powered by ruby and are doing just fine. Granted I don't know how large their user base is, but I do recall seeing DHH tweet about rails being able to at least power a $100m company(basecamp) and now an email service. Im guessing rails is plenty fast enough for those.
Thanks for a great article. I'm new to rails (a couple of months in) and I'm enjoying every minute of it.
The "machine" cost is no where near the "human cost". Unless you have a very specific case (to which you should optimize), there is no need to rewrite anything in X. Hiring additional people that knows X will eclipse whatever you are going to save by using fewer machines.
At the end of the day, the bigger bottlenecks are Databases and disk I/O.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I find it particularly interesting that the critics of rails leave off basecamp, hey, and many other big pieces of software that are powered by ruby and are doing just fine. Granted I don't know how large their user base is, but I do recall seeing DHH tweet about rails being able to at least power a $100m company(basecamp) and now an email service. Im guessing rails is plenty fast enough for those.
Thanks for a great article. I'm new to rails (a couple of months in) and I'm enjoying every minute of it.
The "machine" cost is no where near the "human cost". Unless you have a very specific case (to which you should optimize), there is no need to rewrite anything in X. Hiring additional people that knows X will eclipse whatever you are going to save by using fewer machines.
At the end of the day, the bigger bottlenecks are Databases and disk I/O.