# Re: Joel Spolsky on languages for web programming

**URL:** <https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/re-joel-spolsky-on-languages-for-web-programming/67667>\
**Category:** Ruby\
**Created:** [September 6, 2006, 12:02am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/re-joel-spolsky-on-languages-for-web-programming/67667 "2006-09-06T00:02:42Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![bodikp](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/e79b87/32.png) [@bodikp](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/bodikp)\
**Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 12:02am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/re-joel-spolsky-on-languages-for-web-programming/67667/1 "2006-09-06T00:02:42Z")

</div>

I think he makes an important point that choice of technology is rarely  
a  
proximate cause of project failure. ( EJB & Corba being the two largest  
risk  
I can recall.)

One point he doesn’t make is the difference OPM and MHC (Other Peoples  
Money  
versus My Hard-earned Cash.) When you are spending OPM costs can become  
unreal. So as an employee a “buzz-word compliant/standard approach” Java  
or  
.NET solution might make more sense than a leaner solution that uses  
unfamiliar technology. I can still recall being excoriated by peers and  
a  
manager for choosing to use Ruby to write a proof-of-concept test. The  
Ruby  
spike took eleven minutes to write. A Java version would have taken me  
90  
minutes, and I am a Ruby novice.  
I often ask myself “If this were my cash would I do this?”

I love Java but I wouldn’t use it to write application (cf plumbing)  
code,  
if I were paying the bills.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![bodikp](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/e79b87/32.png) [@bodikp](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/bodikp)\
**Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 12:44am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/re-joel-spolsky-on-languages-for-web-programming/67667/2 "2006-09-06T00:44:46Z")

</div>

On Wed, Sep 06, 2006 at 06:41:45AM +0900, Peter B. wrote:

> I think he makes an important point that choice of technology is rarely a  
> proximate cause of project failure. ( EJB & Corba being the two largest risk  
> I can recall.)

If he makes that point, he does so by accident. His main point is that  
technology (in terms of the ecosystem surrounding the technology as part  
of it) is indeed a cause of failure, and you should thus stick with the  
technologies “everybody knows” are “safe”, to avoid failure.

. . . assuming that by “he” you mean “Joel Spolsky”.

> I love Java but I wouldn’t use it to write application (cf plumbing) code,  
> if I were paying the bills.

I wouldn’t use Java for much of anything unless someone were paying me  
to do it and wasn’t open to alternatives. That’s in large part a matter  
of personal preference, though – I don’t like Java very much.