4 ms·
> People don’t switch tooling and frameworks for fun (well, not primarily), but because the pain of learning something new is worth the benefit of reducing unne
by bartread 6y ago
> People don’t switch tooling and frameworks for fun (well, not primarily), but because the pain of learning something new is worth the benefit of reducing unnecessary complexity.
This is sometimes true, but not always.
For example, it's also sometimes true that teams switch to technology X because X has become popular, and without necessarily understanding the benefits and drawbacks. In some cases a choice is made to switch to X because whatever the team is currently using is "dead"/has gone unsupported.
I think these reasons, along with others such as significant breaking changes between major versions that we've seen with some frameworks and libraries, better hint at sources of frustration over "churn" in JavaScript.
- ballenf 6y agoI think the switches are driven by recruiting just as much as the old thing being “dead” in itself. There’s a sweet spot in the middle of a tech’s popularity where people are cheaper. Very late or early expertise is more expensive. You also are getting people who might be more inclined to learn new things. And that may be a proxy for a good hire.