"Presumably, the actual criteria was likely familiarity and fluency for their tech founder or early developers." Then... why is it so hard for people to just a

"Presumably, the actual criteria was likely familiarity and fluency for their tech founder or early developers." Then... why is it so hard for people to just answer like that? It's a perfectly acceptable reason, but often (like the GP in this subthread) I find people won't actually answer like that. They'll try to come up with weird justifications re: technical merit vs competing tech, and I've found their specific examples might be demonstrably wrong or are just fancier ways of saying "this was a personal preference". What's been lost in all this discussion... the state of the code. I'd much prefer a stack in XYZ with some tests, sample data, repeatable steps, etc. vs a stack in ABC without any of the above.