# On Enterprise Ruby

**URL:** <https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/on-enterprise-ruby/90258>\
**Category:** Ruby\
**Created:** [March 27, 2007, 2:20am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/on-enterprise-ruby/90258 "2007-03-27T02:20:26Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 4

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![alexeyv](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/46a35a/32.png) [@alexeyv](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/alexeyv)\
**Post date:** [April 7, 2007, 2:37am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/on-enterprise-ruby/90258/61 "2007-04-07T02:37:42Z")

</div>

Il giorno 01/apr/07, alle ore 10:34, Pat M. ha scritto:

> > spirit"
> 
> fwiw, my company doesn’t fall in any of those categories. We’re a  
> “real” company building “real” software, and our software is built  
> entirely on Python and Rails. Revenues are definitely over $20k and  
> hopefully waaaaaaay more than that.

Mine too, I develop a web 2.0 project that already attracted  
customers like TomTom and Havaianas - and bigger (and when I say  
bigger I mean BIGGER) names that I’m not sure I can post right  
now … The project is [http://www.zooppa.com](http://www.zooppa.com), and Ruby has been  
choosen over other technologies because we can react to changes in no  
time.  
Ruby is a real technology with real, measureable benefits over  
competitors (and issues too of course, just actually we have more  
benefits than everything else 🙂

ngw

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![alexeyv](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/46a35a/32.png) [@alexeyv](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/alexeyv)\
**Post date:** [April 1, 2007, 11:19pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/on-enterprise-ruby/90258/62 "2007-04-01T23:19:33Z")

</div>

On 4/1/07, Phillip G. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote:

> I’m pretty sure most big  
> companies (non-specialized in IT) don’t really care how a particular job  
> is done, as long as it is done fast and reliable.  
> At least, as long as it is for internal use.

Actually, most do, and rightly so. After an initial release, a  
successful  
application has to be maintained for the next 10 to 30 years. At some  
point  
it becomes “legacy”, which typically means “nobody really understands  
how  
this stuff works anymore; reflecting new business changes is too slow  
and  
too expensive, if at all possible”. Some applications become legacy on  
day 1  
of production. Some don’t. Choice of technology plays a big part here.

Obscure languages become dead languages. To be stuck with an app written  
in  
a dead language is bad in a number of very tangible ways. Well, more and  
more people who make those decisions do not put Ruby in the obscure  
category  
anymore.

May I cite ThoughtWorks Studios when I’m applying for jobs as a  
reference of

> “Real  
> World Ruby” usage? 😉

There are better examples out there, considering that Studios haven’t  
released anything yet.

Well, I’m doubting that it would be possible to write “real” bloatware

> in Ruby, considering it’s tendency to write in a test-driven and agile  
> manner.

So far, people who choose Ruby are people who have a taste for tools and  
practices. Alas, much software is created by people with no such taste,  
and  
fragile code can be written code in any language.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![alexeyv](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/46a35a/32.png) [@alexeyv](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/alexeyv)\
**Post date:** [April 25, 2008, 12:23am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/on-enterprise-ruby/90258/63 "2008-04-25T00:23:58Z")

</div>

I suppose it is worth capturing in a “new” post, but…

We’re now a year later … from the original post by Alexey. Rails is  
well on its way (even considering Twitter).

But, I’m not sure Ruby is any further along as an accepted Enterprise  
(regardless of your definition) technology. Yes, there a slew of new  
books, blog posts, libraries, etc…but, what about adoption.

I would still assert that the job opportunities are the same…excluding  
Rails work.

The only interesting new developments here are with JRuby and IronRuby.  
That fact that both exist would indicate someone from the Enterprise  
would is interested. JRuby probably more than IronRuby will bring the  
potential of true Enterprise development with Ruby to bear.

Anyone else care to play catch up?

Kit

[Previous page](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/on-enterprise-ruby/90258.md?page=3)