# InstantRails vs. RubyStack **URL:** \ **Category:** Rails\ **Created:** [December 1, 2007, 8:00pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/instantrails-vs-rubystack/121843 "2007-12-01T20:00:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![tdellaringa](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/7bcc69/32.png) [@tdellaringa](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tdellaringa)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2007, 8:00pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/instantrails-vs-rubystack/121843/1 "2007-12-01T20:00:48Z")
I’ve been poking around Ruby and Rails tutorials after being away from it since 05. I want to get into developing Rails applications, and I have plans for 2 of them, but first I need to get up to speed. So, Rails environment. IR has been discontinued and RubyStack has picked it up. I did some stuff this week using InstantRails and it worked fine, I have not yet tried RubyStack. My question revolves around 2 issues. 1. As far as learning goes, does it matter which one? I just picked up the 2nd Revision of the Agile book and I will be using that. They seem to install RoR piecemeal in the book and not use either one. 2. What about long term development wise? Since IR is discontinued does it makes sense to go with RS? ---
**Author:** ![tdellaringa](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/7bcc69/32.png) [@tdellaringa](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tdellaringa)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2007, 8:18pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/instantrails-vs-rubystack/121843/2 "2007-12-01T20:18:48Z")
Hi Tom, I have not used either, but hopefully my input might be of some use. It really depends on what kind of developer you are and your own personality. I’m a recovering perfectionist, which means I’m generally Type A and I lean toward being a control freak. I prefer to do most things myself, so I typically don’t go much for things like InstantRails (or even Locomotive on the Mac). I don’t really like to use many plugins either as I’d rather roll my own stuff. Hmm. Makes me wonder why I use Rails at all…ha ha. Anyway, I’d say try the lowest level first (a la the book), then only move up as it makes sense to you. Peace, Phillip ---
**Author:** ![tdellaringa](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/7bcc69/32.png) [@tdellaringa](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tdellaringa)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2007, 8:49pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/instantrails-vs-rubystack/121843/3 "2007-12-01T20:49:48Z")
Phillip K. wrote: > Anyway, I’d say try the lowest level first (a la the book), then only > move up as it makes sense to you. Actually the book mentions InstantRails as the first option and suggests installing it… I think it was different in the first version. I guess I will go with that now and worry about it later. ---
**Author:** ![tdellaringa](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/7bcc69/32.png) [@tdellaringa](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tdellaringa)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2007, 10:06pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/instantrails-vs-rubystack/121843/4 "2007-12-01T22:06:45Z")
Trent B. wrote: > instant rails works great. you can update the rails and gems. it is > easy to use, and just a click to start mongrel too. it comes with an > easy way to modify the database, without getting a program. but, it is > no longer in development. but i still use it. it is a lot easier then > the stack, on windows. I have to say right now I’m really liking it too - very easy, up and running in like a minute. How different is the RubyStack? Is IR something you’d use when building an actual application? > on the ide, NetBeans 6.0 just rules right now. it has great code > completion and you can see your def’s in your controller. Thanks for the tip - I’m going to try it. I’m using InType right now, which is light and really nice however doesn’t have any advanced features so you end up doing more typing than you really need to… but I hope they keep developing it. ---
**Author:** ![tdellaringa](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/7bcc69/32.png) [@tdellaringa](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tdellaringa)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2007, 10:03pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/instantrails-vs-rubystack/121843/5 "2007-12-01T22:03:32Z")
Tom D. wrote: > Phillip K. wrote: > > > Anyway, I’d say try the lowest level first (a la the book), then only > > move up as it makes sense to you. > > Actually the book mentions InstantRails as the first option and suggests > installing it… I think it was different in the first version. I guess I > will go with that now and worry about it later. instant rails works great. you can update the rails and gems. it is easy to use, and just a click to start mongrel too. it comes with an easy way to modify the database, without getting a program. but, it is no longer in development. but i still use it. it is a lot easier then the stack, on windows. on the ide, NetBeans 6.0 just rules right now. it has great code completion and you can see your def’s in your controller. -t