3 ms·
> So what? I think the intention is: While they are important to us, languages are frequently distorted to the point that we believe that company success as a
by cloverich 10y ago
> So what?
I think the intention is: While they are important to us, languages are frequently distorted to the point that we believe that company success as a whole is dependent on it. Companies like Facebook flatly contradict that. I agree with you in spirit: Facebook would obviously prefer not PHP. But if the choice is: Learn something other than PHP or use language I know to test some idea, I think the latter is an obvious choice.
- evilduck 10y agoRunaway successes like FB are outliers. Failed businesses OTOH are quite common and usually have a number of causes where bad technology choices can be at least a factor. You call it poor management in retrospect, but it's succeeding in spite of the tools when you're still doing ok. There's a lot of companies that exist in between failure and "Facebook" who don't have hockey stick growth curves who also can't afford needlessly higher technology costs, whether that's in infrastructure or staffing or opportunity costs in getting features to market. If PHP does't incur a higher cost personally, go for it, but it might be a strategic disadvantage later if you don't hit it big.