5 ms·
It's fascinating that a MS loyalist like Joel would end up using so much linux/oss software. I wonder if Joel regrets not going 100% open source. I guess the
by grandalf 16y ago
It's fascinating that a MS loyalist like Joel would end up using so much linux/oss software.
I wonder if Joel regrets not going 100% open source. I guess the cost of Microsoft licensing for all that is still very cheap if viewed as the price of being featured in Bing searches.
- mymex1 16y agoThe site states that they are using a WISC stack via BizSpark, which gives companies free use of a TON of tools and software for something like 4 years or once they make over $1 million in revenue. Sure, you could also do this for free using open source tools, but I would GLADLY pay a couple grand in licensing fees if my company was making over a $million in revenue using the Microsoft stack.I think the fact that StackOverflow uses a WISC stack is a testament to its reliability and robustness. Hey, whatever gets the job done.
- ig1 16y agoI'd presume that they've broken the million dollar bizspark limit or they're doing something very wrong...
- spolsky 16y agoThis might possibly be the most ridiculous comment I've ever seen on the internet, let alone Hacker News. * I am not a Microsoft Loyalist * I don't make the technical decisions. Why would I? I'm the person who knows the least * It is not necessary to use Microsoft licensing to be featured in Bing searches... that is possibly the most preposterous thing I have ever heard in my life * Microsoft licensing is a rounding error, with the possible exception of SQL Server licenses * Your bizarre personification of Stack Overflow as "Joel" is charming and quaint and completely obnoxious to the 20-odd people at Stack Overflow that actually do the work instead of sitting around browsing hacker news like I do
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- MatiasNino 16y agoWelcome to the modern Internet - where the digital equivalent of the crazy homeless zealot also happens to know your name and career details.
- grandalf 16y ago1) I think the word "loyalist" was poorly chosen on my part. I meant it only to describe how Fog Creek has traditionally been a fairly Microsoft oriented shop... even after (in my opinion) open source languages/platforms began to surpass MS in usability, documentation, and community support. 2) While it may be the case that it is not necessary to use MS technology to be featured in Bing searches, I think you (Joel) are among the more influential developers in the world and that your firm leverages Microsoft's latest technology was likely a factor in the decision to "feature" the results instead of simply displaying them first when they're relevant. Maybe I'm cynical but that seems like a smart marketing move on Microsoft's part. 3) My mention of license pricing was intended to include all licensing costs, including SQL server. I'd guess the cost of your setup as described would be about $150K in licenses... Perhaps rounding error but still a nice developer salary. 4) No disrespect or insult was meant by my comment. I started out using 100% Microsoft tools and technologies, and I've been intrigued to see open source projects start to offer compelling value and features. Mostly my comment was intended to express surprise that it's not simply a matter of "rounding error" costs to do a 100% Microsoft solution for a major site... and that things like Redis and Ubuntu are part of the reason that StackOverflow is as performant as it is.
- jswinghammer 16y agoThere is a group of a people who will get worked up if they think you would say anything neutral or positive about Microsoft products. I'm not sure why but a sizeable number of people believe that you must be getting bribes from Microsoft to use their software.
- keithwarren 16y agoThat you would reply to this - makes me respect you even more
- grandalf 16y agoAnd I you.
- selectnull 16y ago"...instead of sitting around browsing hacker news like I do." I think I'll redefine my definition of success to include this. :)
- kprobst 16y agoI'm going to guess it's just a result of just using the best tools for the job. His developers know the MS stack, so it makes sense to build the application on top of that. Things like Redis and HAProxy are traditionally better left to run on a *nix server. I use MongoDB on Server 2008 for testing and whatnot, but once that goes to production it's going into a Linux box. That the opposite isn't generally true (a mostly FOSS project using Microsoft bits) is a testament to what's available on the FOSS side, of course. Your use of the word "loyalist" implies some kind of blind joined-at-the-hip fanboysm is at play on Spolsky's brain. I think that's probably very far from the truth. Those of us who use and take advantage of Microsoft technologies are also quite capable of recognizing that some things are better done on other platforms. I.e., best tool for the job.
- kenjackson 16y agoI think this is one of the things that a lot of people in the FOSS don't get. Most ppl I know on the MS stack use it because its the best tool for their job. But will also use FOSS where it makes sense. They're just not as ideological, and are much more technology driven. I suspect the staff at Stack Overflow never blinked at using FOSS software. I suspect they said, "we need capability X, lets find the best tool to handle it".
- mythz 16y agoI really wish it were the case that most devs on the MS-stack don't drink the kool-aid and use all-things-Microsoft. There are still devs using DataSet's in VB.NET, pushing the SOAP envelope, using the MS Patterns & Practices stack and continue to develop ASP.NET web apps like state-heavy windows apps since that's what they were told to do. I don't blame anyone for forming a stereo type on .NET devs, considering pre-ASP.NET MVC (years late to the game), there was no competing web framework to the anti-web state-heavy ASP.NET, simply because IMHO there was none sanctioned for use by MS. Sadly there is an inherent Microsoft culture that will only believe and advocate anything as long as they've read it on microsoft.com. Despite their failed DAL's and poor application frameworks, Truth is IMHO Microsoft have created a superior development platform with C#/.NET and with VS.NET/R# by the C# devs side, it's one of the most productive ones to use. Fortunately there are free-thinking pro developers, not constrained to think inside MS toolbox, who just want to use the best software they can use, regardless of the culture. Interestingly it seems a lot of the time C#/FOSS devs will independently come to the same conclusions on best-of-class FOSS software to use: e.g. nginx / redis / linux / naigos -- i.e. the best tool for the job. StackOverflow is clearly one such 'pro-dev company' not shackled to the MS Platform nor will purposely/religiously maintain an anti-MS stance since they'll continue to use MS tools and products where they think to be highest quality (i.e. C# / IIS7 / SQL Server). It's quite clear StackOverflow has a job to do, and they'll end up choosing the best tools they think to do it. I believe this pro-dev, high-quality culture is why they've become so popular, providing some of the most enjoyable website experiences on the Internet - all without skipping a beat, or with a hint of growing pains.
- bad_user 16y ago
- matthewcarriere 16y agoWhile the comment might have come off as "ridiculous" I think the underlying theme is quite pertinent. First, in response to Joel's comment, obviously Stack Overflow is personified as "Joel", the same way Apple is "Steve" and Windows is "Bill". What I find charming is your personification of it as collection of individuals who are are equally invested... it must be ponies and rainbows over there. What's pertinent about the comment and probably at the heart of his "fascination" (mine too) is how this product is held up as a poster child for ASP.NET MVC, without giving the "whole story". The is very common of the Microsoft evangelists. Let's be clear, I am not accusing Joel of being a "loyalist" I think he is probably only pinned as one because of these evangelists running around trumpeting the use of ASP.NET MVC for this successful site. The true MS loyalists will never read this article or decide that Stack Overflow just "doesn't know about" the correct MS technology stack that could eliminate his need for any Open source. So that's what's "fascinating". That an ASP.NET MVC application did not stay inside the reservation. As for the right tool for the job nonsense, let's cut the bullshit. We all make religious decisions when we "start" a software project. You build out an idea your excited about in a language/platform your excited about. What's interesting here is that the real world of success has demanded an open source stack... and it could very well be cost and not capability. You are in FANTASY LAND if you think you would be paying a "couple grand" in licensing to scale out to what Stack Overflow must need to run its service. Add about 3 more zeros to that guess-timate. End of the day, I don't think anyone regrets not going 100% open source you build it in what your excited about. The story I would be most interested in is what performance/cost analysis was done that steered them in the technology directions they took. I think we could all learn from that.
- citricsquid 16y agoAh I meant to upvote your comment and hit the down arrow, sorry.
- kenjackson 16y agoAs for the right tool for the job nonsense, let's cut the bullshit. We all make religious decisions when we "start" a software project. I think you speak for yourself here. The fact that you can't even imagine that people don't make religious decisions at the start of a project is telling.