That's precisely the point: a low-performance platform causes you to need to scale and bring out complex system architecture way earlier in your project's lifet

That's precisely the point: a low-performance platform causes you to need to scale and bring out complex system architecture way earlier in your project's lifetime. Systems that would be just fine on a single cheap server using high-performance software find themselves ramping up complexity with only very modest usage. I'd prefer to avoid the need to scale to deal with a few hundred concurrent users. I'd prefer to imagine my CPU yawning and asking for more. You may be speaking of very low-traffic systems, and I will agree that with such a scenario, any technology could suffice. But in 2016, we programmers enjoy a lot of options for building web applications and services, including many high-performance platforms that are a joy to work with. Putting aside subjective matters such as existing preferences and experience, if you've got a new project and an open mind, why bother with low-performance when you can have high-performance and ultra-fast response to user requests? To be clear, I'm not saying existing preferences and experience are unimportant. But if you find yourself entertaining the option of using something new, I recommend factoring high-performance into the selection process to enjoy the peace of mind that it brings.