4 ms·
I don't understand your criticism. All that the article says is that there are benefits to using well-understood technologies that have been around for a while
by arctangent 16y ago
I don't understand your criticism. All that the article says is that there are benefits to using well-understood technologies that have been around for a while and have proven to be fairly stable.
As someone who works (during the day) for a government agency with well over a million employees, this is something I understand well. Granted, we're not Twitter - but we do serve a silly amount of data using old-fashioned and "boring" technology, and we're glad that we use it because it's proven itself to be reliable.
- gfodor 16y agoHe says: "I think many developers (myself included) are easily seduced by new technology and are willing to burn a lot of time rigging it together just for the joy of tinkering. So nowadays we see a lot of fairly uninteresting web apps with very technically sweet implementations." This is rather insulting to two groups of people: people that are working on things this author would not think are interesting, and people who are overcoming technical challenges by deciding to use new, less mature tools since things like the LAMP stack have well known limitations. (the overlap of these people, as you can probably guess, is pretty high.)