[2009] You're doing it wrong. > Ruby is a dynamically typed [7] language, as Smalltalk [8]. I prefer statically typed [9] languages. Without getting into a r

[2009] You're doing it wrong. > Ruby is a dynamically typed [7] language, as Smalltalk [8]. I prefer statically typed [9] languages. Without getting into a religious battle, I believe that Ruby is a better (web) language than Java. He later concedes the point that "productivity in Java world is a cultural problem." Culture, for better or worse, is part of a language. > Scaffolding is passive code generation, as IDE wizards or AppFuse [10]. I prefer active code generation [11], or even better, no code generation at all. Scaffolding is a tutorial only experience. There were definitely some awkwardness in how scaffolding was presented but it is definitely not the Rails Way anymore. (edit: And never really was.) > Relational database centric: the code generators and ActiveRecord promote think first in tables after in classes. I prefer a more pure OO, as Hibernate [12], JPA [4] or even ODBMS [13]. At the time, I probably would have agreed. ActiveRecord in 2.3 was a bit archaic and the whole database layer got much improved in 3. I use Mongoid. > MVC [14]: I'm looking for something newer and better that an old MVC framework. Why? I understand his point. He is arguing that the language doesn't much matter and that the 10x productivity is a myth of Rails. While I think the productivity is a bit exaggerated, you really need to get into long projects on both before making a judgement call. Java Spring applications with nHibernate are usually encumbered by Java 'best practices' and not the language. Culture is everything.