<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Ruby is not ready for production. Definitive proof.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://almaer.com/blog/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://almaer.com/blog/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof</link>
	<description>blogging about life, the universe, and everything tech</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Sep 2012 07:06:53 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mormon</title>
		<link>http://almaer.com/blog/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof/comment-page-1#comment-39366</link>
		<dc:creator>Mormon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 22:37:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://almaer.com/blog2/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof#comment-39366</guid>
		<description>Having used Java and Ruby...I&#039;d bet that Java scaled just as poorly compared to C as Ruby does compared to Java currently, in 1998.  So look out Java, in about 10 years... :)
-R</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Having used Java and Ruby&#8230;I&#8217;d bet that Java scaled just as poorly compared to C as Ruby does compared to Java currently, in 1998.  So look out Java, in about 10 years&#8230; :)<br />
-R</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Victor</title>
		<link>http://almaer.com/blog/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof/comment-page-1#comment-32124</link>
		<dc:creator>Victor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Mar 2006 14:54:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://almaer.com/blog2/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof#comment-32124</guid>
		<description>It is very interesting to read something like &#039;Ruby is not scalable enough&#039; and &#039;Java scales better than Ruby&#039;, etc.

Folks, look around, there is amlost no high load sites in the net which work on Java. (Except .sun.com, maybe) everything else is written in PHP, Python, Perl, Ruby and runs on LiNUX or FreeBSD. No Java.

Even google is not known to use java...
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is very interesting to read something like &#8216;Ruby is not scalable enough&#8217; and &#8216;Java scales better than Ruby&#8217;, etc.</p>
<p>Folks, look around, there is amlost no high load sites in the net which work on Java. (Except .sun.com, maybe) everything else is written in PHP, Python, Perl, Ruby and runs on LiNUX or FreeBSD. No Java.</p>
<p>Even google is not known to use java&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephan Schwab</title>
		<link>http://almaer.com/blog/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof/comment-page-1#comment-32123</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephan Schwab</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Mar 2006 05:20:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://almaer.com/blog2/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof#comment-32123</guid>
		<description>&gt; Does anyone else think it is ironic that we had to create an acronym for using Objects and keeping things simple?

You know why? Lots of developers are not that old. They haven&#039;t seen time over time how hype is created and disappears. You can tell them whatever story you like and if it&#039;s well done and &quot;cool&quot;, they will talk about the &quot;next big thing&quot; to all their young friends and how &quot;cool&quot; this new toy is. When they are in this business for 15 years more, then they start to remember and eventually realize that there is nothing new about POJOs.

Another example: go and ask an old hand about virtualization. Nothing new for folks who have been working with mainframes before. In fact it&#039;s a bad sad to see that in this industry a lot of &quot;new ideas&quot; aren&#039;t so new at all. It&#039;s more like a re-play. True innovation is rare.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>> Does anyone else think it is ironic that we had to create an acronym for using Objects and keeping things simple?</p>
<p>You know why? Lots of developers are not that old. They haven&#8217;t seen time over time how hype is created and disappears. You can tell them whatever story you like and if it&#8217;s well done and &#8220;cool&#8221;, they will talk about the &#8220;next big thing&#8221; to all their young friends and how &#8220;cool&#8221; this new toy is. When they are in this business for 15 years more, then they start to remember and eventually realize that there is nothing new about POJOs.</p>
<p>Another example: go and ask an old hand about virtualization. Nothing new for folks who have been working with mainframes before. In fact it&#8217;s a bad sad to see that in this industry a lot of &#8220;new ideas&#8221; aren&#8217;t so new at all. It&#8217;s more like a re-play. True innovation is rare.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephan Schwab</title>
		<link>http://almaer.com/blog/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof/comment-page-1#comment-32122</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephan Schwab</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Mar 2006 05:20:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://almaer.com/blog2/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof#comment-32122</guid>
		<description>&gt; Does anyone else think it is ironic that we had to create an acronym for using Objects and keeping things simple?

You know why? Lots of developers are not that old. They haven&#039;t seen time over time how hype is created and disappears. You can tell them whatever story you like and if it&#039;s well done and &quot;cool&quot;, they will talk about the &quot;next big thing&quot; to all their young friends and how &quot;cool&quot; this new toy is. When they are in this business for 15 years more, then they start to remember and eventually realize that there is nothing new about POJOs.

Another example: go and ask an old hand about virtualization. Nothing new for folks who have been working with mainframes before. In fact it&#039;s a bad sad to see that in this industry a lot of &quot;new ideas&quot; aren&#039;t so new at all. It&#039;s more like a re-play. True innovation is rare.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>> Does anyone else think it is ironic that we had to create an acronym for using Objects and keeping things simple?</p>
<p>You know why? Lots of developers are not that old. They haven&#8217;t seen time over time how hype is created and disappears. You can tell them whatever story you like and if it&#8217;s well done and &#8220;cool&#8221;, they will talk about the &#8220;next big thing&#8221; to all their young friends and how &#8220;cool&#8221; this new toy is. When they are in this business for 15 years more, then they start to remember and eventually realize that there is nothing new about POJOs.</p>
<p>Another example: go and ask an old hand about virtualization. Nothing new for folks who have been working with mainframes before. In fact it&#8217;s a bad sad to see that in this industry a lot of &#8220;new ideas&#8221; aren&#8217;t so new at all. It&#8217;s more like a re-play. True innovation is rare.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Todd Huss</title>
		<link>http://almaer.com/blog/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof/comment-page-1#comment-32121</link>
		<dc:creator>Todd Huss</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2006 20:15:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://almaer.com/blog2/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof#comment-32121</guid>
		<description>Great post Dion, got me to thinking about why everyone is so hung up on language scalability so I wrote up my thoughts on the matter here:

http://gabrito.com/post/will-a-language-scale-wrong-question
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post Dion, got me to thinking about why everyone is so hung up on language scalability so I wrote up my thoughts on the matter here:</p>
<p><a href="http://gabrito.com/post/will-a-language-scale-wrong-question" rel="nofollow">http://gabrito.com/post/will-a-language-scale-wrong-question</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Another Know-It-All</title>
		<link>http://almaer.com/blog/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof/comment-page-1#comment-32120</link>
		<dc:creator>Another Know-It-All</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Mar 2006 14:48:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://almaer.com/blog2/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof#comment-32120</guid>
		<description>Java is a horrible programming language. Ruby is _acceptable_. But Java is much more production-ready, since its been around longer and had better support.

Lets seperate language from implementation. A ruby compiler to the JVM would indeed be much more usefull for real-life productions than the current ruby implementations.

But from a language point-of-view Java, is perhaps  the weirdest language on the block. It has crappy abstraction mechanisms, yet enforces what it has to the end. They solved like 10% of these problems with the support of (what they call) generics. Which gives you a kind of poor-man implementation of polymorphism embedded in a language that wasn&#039;t designed to support it in the first place.

Java is all buzz, all marketing. I personally (at this point in time) would recommend people to switch to Mono/.NET so at least they can built and use a framework that isn&#039;t language specific.

Please stop forcing the good programmers that want to use the right programming languages to use crappy languages when they are only one that have descent support and frameworks suitable for scalability.

And no I wouldn&#039;t use Ruby for something that has to be scalable as well. If scalability/support/framework wasn&#039;t an issue all together I would problely use Haskell-Server-Page anyways, rather than the ruby&#039;s middle ground. But I can imagine that HSP would never get that kind of support since about 90% of the script-kiddies that actually land a job at the corps aren&#039;t educated enough to use such technology correctly anyway.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Java is a horrible programming language. Ruby is _acceptable_. But Java is much more production-ready, since its been around longer and had better support.</p>
<p>Lets seperate language from implementation. A ruby compiler to the JVM would indeed be much more usefull for real-life productions than the current ruby implementations.</p>
<p>But from a language point-of-view Java, is perhaps  the weirdest language on the block. It has crappy abstraction mechanisms, yet enforces what it has to the end. They solved like 10% of these problems with the support of (what they call) generics. Which gives you a kind of poor-man implementation of polymorphism embedded in a language that wasn&#8217;t designed to support it in the first place.</p>
<p>Java is all buzz, all marketing. I personally (at this point in time) would recommend people to switch to Mono/.NET so at least they can built and use a framework that isn&#8217;t language specific.</p>
<p>Please stop forcing the good programmers that want to use the right programming languages to use crappy languages when they are only one that have descent support and frameworks suitable for scalability.</p>
<p>And no I wouldn&#8217;t use Ruby for something that has to be scalable as well. If scalability/support/framework wasn&#8217;t an issue all together I would problely use Haskell-Server-Page anyways, rather than the ruby&#8217;s middle ground. But I can imagine that HSP would never get that kind of support since about 90% of the script-kiddies that actually land a job at the corps aren&#8217;t educated enough to use such technology correctly anyway.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Keith Pitty</title>
		<link>http://almaer.com/blog/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof/comment-page-1#comment-32119</link>
		<dc:creator>Keith Pitty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Mar 2006 06:45:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://almaer.com/blog2/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof#comment-32119</guid>
		<description>John Smith: You say &#039;Most Rails fanboys are at the &quot;all Java sucks&quot; side&#039;. I think that&#039;s a sweeping statement. Like Dion, I am a fan of Rails but I certainly don&#039;t think &quot;all Java sucks&quot; - as I&#039;ve written (see http://squizlog.keithpitty.org/archives/000425.html), I think both Rails and J2EE have their strengths and weaknesses. It&#039;s case of choosing the best tool for the job at hand.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John Smith: You say &#8216;Most Rails fanboys are at the &#8220;all Java sucks&#8221; side&#8217;. I think that&#8217;s a sweeping statement. Like Dion, I am a fan of Rails but I certainly don&#8217;t think &#8220;all Java sucks&#8221; &#8211; as I&#8217;ve written (see <a href="http://squizlog.keithpitty.org/archives/000425.html)" rel="nofollow">http://squizlog.keithpitty.org/archives/000425.html)</a>, I think both Rails and J2EE have their strengths and weaknesses. It&#8217;s case of choosing the best tool for the job at hand.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Guillaume</title>
		<link>http://almaer.com/blog/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof/comment-page-1#comment-32118</link>
		<dc:creator>Guillaume</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Mar 2006 19:52:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://almaer.com/blog2/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof#comment-32118</guid>
		<description>Best counter-example based on rails: http://www.penny-arcade.com/
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Best counter-example based on rails: <a href="http://www.penny-arcade.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.penny-arcade.com/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: john smith</title>
		<link>http://almaer.com/blog/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof/comment-page-1#comment-32117</link>
		<dc:creator>john smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Mar 2006 16:54:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://almaer.com/blog2/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof#comment-32117</guid>
		<description>I think you see posts like Hani&#039;s because the Rails fanboys compare Rails to Java and say Rails is better period.  It&#039;s not.  It might be better in a small subset of projects that can be written in Java, but it isn&#039;t a replacement for Java.

Maybe you are in the middle of the road, but most Rails fanboys are at the &quot;all Java sucks&quot; side.  Are you surprised that some people come out on the &quot;all Rails sucks&quot; side?

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you see posts like Hani&#8217;s because the Rails fanboys compare Rails to Java and say Rails is better period.  It&#8217;s not.  It might be better in a small subset of projects that can be written in Java, but it isn&#8217;t a replacement for Java.</p>
<p>Maybe you are in the middle of the road, but most Rails fanboys are at the &#8220;all Java sucks&#8221; side.  Are you surprised that some people come out on the &#8220;all Rails sucks&#8221; side?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Berger</title>
		<link>http://almaer.com/blog/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof/comment-page-1#comment-32116</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel Berger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:37:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://almaer.com/blog2/ruby-is-not-ready-for-production-definitive-proof#comment-32116</guid>
		<description>Hani and Java deserve each other.

The silent majority - ROFLMAO!!!
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hani and Java deserve each other.</p>
<p>The silent majority &#8211; ROFLMAO!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
