Do you think we are stupid?

If there's a positive side to some of the anti-Ruby negativity, it's that new voices are joining the fray. In the must-read If Rails Is A Ghetto, Please, Let Me Be Ghetto, John Munsch sums up the current anti-Ruby sentiment pretty well:

Everybody who has seen the explosive growth of Ruby and Rails over the last couple of years eclipse their favorite language/framework (e.g. Python, Groovy, PHP, etc.) seems to be blogging or commenting this idea that Ruby and Rails isn't really that great, it's just hype. It's only a committed few who have something to gain from you adopting Rails (i.e. a book to sell, consultant hours, etc.) who are promoting something that is snake oil.

Seriously, how stupid do you think we all are? I've been doing professional development since 1985 and doing it full time since '87. Do you really think that I and thousands of others can't tell when something works and it doesn't? I did HTML when the only browser was NCSA Mosaic and ASP websites to build DevGames.com and then later GameDev.net in 1999. That was painful. I can tell the freaking difference people. This works and it works well. I might not pick it for building the next version of eBay because it wouldn't stand up to the load, but I would pick it for building the early versions of the next site that will become as big as eBay because it will offer that site lots of fast growth and flexibility.

Comments

[Rob Morris]

I'm certainly in the camp of those who choose Ruby/Rails willingly and on the merits. I've been developing code professionally (Java, C++, ASP, Lisp) since '95 or so. After spending 2 years doing Java-based web work during the dot-com 1.0 era, I stopped coding for the web. It was that annoying. God, the endless accessors... :-) I came back to web based software purely due to the joy of coding in Ruby and Rails. It really is that fun.

That said, there are some abrasive Rails boosters out there, and coupling that with the growing pains of a new framework, language, etc., it's easy to see how people who aren't interested in new ways of doing things could feel rightfully annoyed with all the clamor.

Finally, a thought to consider - it feels to me like Ruby/Rails is the first software "big thing" in the Blog era. I think that's contributing a lot to this whole mess. There are new rules to be discovered now that everyone is basically talking at the same table. New etiquette, new civility, and new ways of interacting. Until people work those issues out, we'll get the flamewars and overstatements we're seeing. Hopefully it will die out in the next year or so.

I'm certainly a lot more careful now about what I write, even on small interest blogs, since every word can be reviewed, copied, quoted and discussed.

Happy coding. ;-)

[nap]

/me applauds softly

[Tim Connor]

@rob - the blog age is just an extension of the BBS/usenet age. Nothing new to all the that behavior, actually. Maybe the mainstream sees it a bit more, but the programmers always have.

[Rob Morris]

@Tim - Certainly! God knows, flame wars aren't new. But BBS rivalries were local affairs. Blogs are global. And really, there's something sort of inherently pompous (sorry!) about blogging. I think it adds to the problem. There's this sort of descent from a chariot on high thing going on that is distinctly more inflammatory than just adding another posting to Usenet or whatever. Maybe I'm off base with this, but it seems to me that if Java were coming of age today, instead of Ruby, lots of C++ guys would be making the same kind of fuss, with the same disappointing results.

Lots of folks like Rails, and the current furor is unlikely to sway that. With luck, the noise will encourage people to solve the very real issues that Rails has to deal with, and keep making it a tighter, cleaner framework for the benefit of all.

[Lolinator]

http://lolinator.com/lol/blog.obiefernandez.com/content/2008/01/if-theres-a-pos.html

[Adam Mada]

"Everybody who has seen the explosive growth of Ruby and Rails over the last couple of years eclipse their favorite language/framework (e.g. Python, Groovy, PHP, etc.)"

Are you kidding? Before you say something incorrect like this, learn to use Google. The problem a lot of people have with Rails fanboys is that they spend less time concentrating on reality and using verifyable facts in their arguments than they do putting creepy images of themselves on their blog.

[John]

""Everybody who has seen the explosive growth of Ruby and Rails over the last couple of years eclipse their favorite language/framework (e.g. Python, Groovy, PHP, etc.)"

Are you kidding? Before you say something incorrect like this, learn to use Google. ..."

I'm not a Ruby programmer, but I do think that Ruby has seen an explosive *growth rate* compared to other languages (I know, not exactly what was said but I believe that is what the author meant.) That said, growth rates tend to look like s-curves, in the best case (and bell curves in the worst). Who knows where Ruby is on it's growth curve.

I get annoyed by the fandom attitude. Ruby is not the freakin' second coming.

[Mark Wilden]

All this talk of Rails "hype" reminds me of the early days of OOP on the PC. I must have heard a jillion people tell me that OOP is not a panacea. The only thing is, no one said it was.

Same with Rails. Maybe I'm just lucky, but I've never heard Rails called a panacea, either. I don't know who these "fanboys" are. I haven't met them and if they're on the net, I haven't seen them. I got into Rails because people like Dave Thomas made it sound good. Not perfect - good.

What I have seen in both cases is people complaining about the (to me) nonexistent hype. In at least some cases, those people are using the "hype" as an excuse not to learn something that a lot of smart people find useful.

///ark

[John Munsch]

I fully agree with what Mark Wilden said there. It's the dismissive attitude I was "railing" (sorry) against there. The attitude that Rails was _only_ hype. To think that is to assume that I'm dumb as hell and can use it and still be unable to tell sizzle from steak.

One of the things I hope to do next is post something along the lines of, "Ten Reasons I Love Working With Rails". It'll be positive, be evangelistic, but hopefully not be in any way a religious confrontation with others who prefer to use a different language or framework. Perhaps that's the best thing I can do to support Rails until I can grow my skills to a point I could actually contribute something.

[Shanti Braford]

@John -

Re: your last comment - I believe that kind of article would only add flames to the fire, at this point.

Rails has reached a point now, not unlike 37 Signals itself and Apple, where it has a significant number of ardent followers. (not by any stretch of the imagination does rails have as many fanboys as Apple, or Linux, for example)

Like one of Kathy Sierra's blog posts (forget which), it's impossible for these kinds of successful communities to avoid another, different but significant, percentage of people who are on the outside and do not understand the fervor. They in turn call the attention "hype" and will, for whatever reason, be dismissive of any advances, announcements, accolades, etc from that community.

[Gerard Byrne]

I would have to agree with a number of the posters here regarding RoR's pedigree. RoR is (still) not mature (age terms) but has certainly achieved an incredible rate of progress.

I have been programming since early 80's. Never 'got' the OO paradigm until I studied Ruby.

Have worked on so many diverse projects over the years and love the way Rails bakes in 'best practice' approaches to so many of the challenges which I have seen in developing/managing software lifecycle.

Yes, there are 'other ways'. Sometimes alternate approaches are better. But who cares. Rails is always at least 'good enough' in its approach to most of the architectural/design underpinnings for Web2.0 apps. And in most cases it is better than hand-rolled libraries.

Rails certainly has limitations - or more correctly compromises - in how it has abstracted some of the ORM stuff. But, in the main the compromises are well thought out and I can see the delicate line which has been walked between flexibility (aka complexity) and practicability.

At the time I took on learning RoR, I almost decided to go with the excellent Django (Python based) framework. But Ruby was the deciding factor between those two alternatives. Ruby is simply so much more 'legible'.

I cannot understand the recent spats. At the end of the day, if something like RoR is not for you - move on. The faraway hills are definitely not greener. There certainly is a degree of passion (pride!) within the Ruby on Rails community but in the main this is IMHO a positive force. I'll take the 'opinionated' RoR camp over the anemic and indecisive approach any day.

GjB

[Brian Adkins]

"Seriously, how stupid do you think we all are?" :)

My sentiments exactly. I've been writing code for 25 years and have been paid to write in at least 11 different programming languages. To think that I can't tell which ones allow me to be more productive in a given situation is ridiculous. My bread & butter from 1996 until 2006 was Java; I was more productive in Java than I was in C++, but it didn't take much Ruby experience before I realized it was a huge win for me. Rails is great currently, but I wouldn't be surprised if other frameworks gain some mindshare - Ruby is what I'm primarily impressed with.

http://lojic.com/blog/2008/01/17/2008-programming-language-plan/

BTW I would have commented on John Munsch's blog, but too many hoops dude.

[Bob]

I once dated a girl named Ruby. She was built like a rail.

[Jeff Helman]

Re: "Do you think we are stupid"

I see it as a possibility.