What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Do you believe the 2012 Mayan Prophecy? view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - The Mayan Calendar predicts the end of time: 2012. See the trailer for 2012, opening November 13.
46 Comments
- sbrown123, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Blah. What a horrible way to respond to someone finding issues with Ruby. A whole bunch of "WTF" followed by "I never had that problem" or "the ranter was an idiot". It also appears rather rushed out in an angry rage rather than responded in an informative fashion. Very fanboyish.
Listen: Ruby has downsides. ALL languages do. Work them out and stop shouting. If someone finds issue: so be it. There are other languages that may be more to what they are needing. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4My point is WHO THE ***** CARES ABOUT RUBY ON RAILS?? Just like an ***** everyone has an opinion and some idiots dugg the story. All these passionate ***** all hooked on rails makes me crazy. In about 6 months we'll be on to the next ROR or AJAX topic so get over it.
- heinousjay, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Jesus, two poorly written articles swatting at each other like gay kids on the grade school playground. This is why I read Digg - sissyfights!
- bloodroot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Great response. It's unfortunate that a poorly written rant filled with misinformation can make it to the front page of digg.
- darryl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2dude responds like someone insulted his mom... funny, petty, sad.
- lbft, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Why the hell are Rails fans incapable of actually listening to anything that isn't positive about it? Whether or not the ranter's points were valid, the way that this fool has flamed him has just reminded me as to why I haven't tried to learn Ruby and Rails yet - the fanboys are just too dominant in the development community.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Sorry, I won't go to joelonsoftware for anything. That guy is famous in sort of the same way Paris Hilton is famous. Never done anything to speak of, but all the dumbasses will worship him/her.
- piniondna, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I thought the original commentary on Rails showed a certain amount of respect for the framework, but had some constructive criticism. Hell... he even supplied possible improvements!
The counter commentary mostly resorts to ad hominem attacks on the original poster, and general ***** (if that's even a word).
I like Rails, but this obsession by fanboys to defend their favorite toy ANY time a criticism is level borders on the insane. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Thanks for the post but stop the rails grinding, damn skaters!!!! ;).
- Massif, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Any rant that picks apart another rant piece by piece is usually filled with defensive garbage. I thoroughly enjoyed his constant use of "WTF?"
- Elxx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Haha, wow. So first we have bias against Rails in the earlier article. Now we have complete Rails fanboyism.
Could somebody *please* post at least a mostly impartial article about this? - furtwan1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1this is the problem with OSS, the users get religious about the technology. The fact that this guy felt it necessary to reply to several legitimate concerns with RoR, is pretty pathetic.
- Qwertie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1By the way, I actually think Joel was being ironic when he said that Rails "sucks". What he was really saying was that it has a lot of potential but it just needs some extra coolness and documentation to really fly. Or maybe I'm wrong.
- nightchrome, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1The hype surrounding Rails is bordering on ridiculous these days. It's really nothing special at all.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1rails is full of fan boyism. i fail to see what it is better at then any language at all.
- keej, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0We need another article in this saga. Title: "In response to In response to Rails Riduculous Restrictions"
I love having my RSS feeds cluttered by rants that use liberal doses of "WTF?" - curmudgeon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Meatloaf new what he was talking about. If he only listened to himself.
- thundercleese, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Thanks.
- SkaAgent11, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1The poster should take less time taking offense to what others say about Rails and spend more time learning how to not debate the veracity of claims like a total *****.
- spyres, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Sounds like someone peed in Beowulf's coffee.
*yawn* - CaughtThinking, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Ah someone makes some honest observations, and then someone else feels compelled to prove that Rails continues to have no flaws. Nice.
- Mysidia, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0If the documentation can't be gotten in the same manner as the software, then it's not a manual.
$20 is not spare change one finds lying around somewhere.
Most would have to be intent on doing something pretty darn
big to buy documentation on a programming environment.
Especially a free software one... which should in theory therefore be
distributed with all the documentation needed to develop on
the system... - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0What's wrong with just writing your own code by hand?
- mouthster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Nerd fight
- CoolBlade, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Certainly shed some light for me, I'm only starting with Rails but have been learning Ruby for quite a while now. Whilst these 'rants' are always onesided, it is great to read counter arguments such as this article.
- adizzle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0My problem with the first rant - If you aren't going to take the time/money to buy the $20 rails book on amazon, then you aren't really interested in using rails. Hell, the book is sitting next to me on my desk.
My problem with the second rant - Stop yelling! A majority of his complaints were vaild, and telling him that it couldn't possibly be the fault of your precious rails is just dumb.
Anyhoo... I'm done. Homework time! - grandalf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The rant is misleading. Maybe someone will write functionality to tie rails more strongly to a specific database, but it would be hard to support a common feature set across databases due to the different capabilities of the underlying databases. Rails finds the sweet spot of functionality that allows an application to be portable across databases.
The criticisms of the object relational mapping used by Rails don't entirely make sense. If Rails followed Joel's advice, it would be harder to port existing applications to rails since all tables would have to be renamed.
I suspect that if the author used rails for a few weeks many of his criticisms would evaporate. It's really quite a nice platform. Maybe not perfect for all applications, but quite nice for some. - rmuliana, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0veracon... Rails _has_ faults as any other framework, of course. But not the faults Joel points out. Some Joel's points are really valid (I have to agree about documentation, the Pragmatic book is the only good resource for beginners), but some of them just miss the point.
But once we have a rant and a response for it we got 2 excellent points of view.
I still think the best way to get a honest opinion is give RoR a try. If you like it, it's ok, if you don't like it, it's ok too. - Qwertie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Joel wrote his rant from a beginner's perspective. I'm a beginner myself, but Joel clearly knows more than me about Rails. His article taught me some things I hadn't figured out yet, which leads me to the heart of the matter, which I think is Rails' poor documentation.
Beowulf's solution? Everyone should buy a book every time they want to try out a new technology. Great advice, if you can afford it (but which book? Presumably when it comes to Rails, all the books are good, but if we were talking about Java, buying a book is only the solution if you chance upon a *good* book.)
Having 15 months experience, with It was appropriate for Beowulf to explain where Joel went wrong. He should clarify the solutions to Joel's problems, since they aren't obvious, after all; and explain (better) why Rails shouldn't implement Joel's seemingly reasonable suggestions.
Joel's rant was much more enjoyable than this one. No digg. - ephekt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0LAME
- adizzle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0If you are serious about developing an app in rails, $20 is nothing. Also the online documentation is good, however it is a bit daunting to the newbie. If the 20 bucks worries you, compare that to other programming books. It's not that bad.
- beowulf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0A point of clarification. Joel did not write the rant, some dude posting under "a hack" did. He specifically says he is not Joel.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I've already commented to the linked post that I think this guy needs to grow the hell up, but if we take a minute, sit back and figure out what's wrong with RoR, it really is the lack of documentation. All the gotchas in the world can be accounted for if there is an easy place to know that from.
I submit that the major success of PHP isn't that it's a nice language, or its simple, familiar syntax, or its (once) single-purpose featureset, it's in the php.net documentation, which is top notch. If every language had a corresponding manual to the level of php.net, all our programming jobs would be in jeopardy. Rails has nothing of the sort (though railsmanual.org seems to be taking aim on that), and that is why everyone isn't using it now.
For the most part, Joel's insights were right on with my findings when I was first learning Rails, and whether he's right or wrong, if more than one person makes the same wrong conclusion based on what's presented, then it's likely either broken or needs to be better documented (or the people are retards, which I won't exclude).
Simply put though, Rails IS really nice, and it DOES have some bugs. This hissy-fit of a rant, that refuses to acknowledge that there is ANYTHING wrong with the language or framework does Rails a huge disservice. - piki, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I think the first rant was exaggerating intentionally. Some of his statements seemed informed and well thought out, while others were complete brain-farts.
Rails is by no means perfect, but does a damn good job when used for developing web applications. I was a skeptic up until recently (doing my web stuff in Java w/ Struts & Hibernate) but started reading "Agile Web Development..." and I am starting to consider switching over.
The response favored Rails without question, but it does not mean it wasn't correct. However, I think he did exactly what the original ranter wanted -- he got pissed and made mistakes, like the reoccurring "WTF"s in the post. - eyrieowl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0can i digg the "rails ridiculous restrictions" article again, instead?
- shakezilla, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Rails? Does anyone care? Let's argue about which kind of screwdriver is the bestest ever, next.
- zoomie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Jesus, two poorly written articles swatting at each other like gay kids on the grade school playground. This is why I read Digg - sissyfights!"
LMAO. I'm so with you on this - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0shakezilla - RIGHT ON!
This just shows how everyone is just looking for something to flame. Let's try and keep this kind of ***** arguing out of the front page. There's so many other productive things to do. Analyze it yourself and move on. - veracon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Let me first warn that I am quite biased in that I HAVE tried Rails and I wasn't impressed.
I think this article is completely ridiculous. You are argumenting against every single point that was stated in the counterpart, as if it was not at all possible for the original writer to have anything correct. It's like those press people who never allow any bad information about a certain person come out; they HAVE to argument against it, so the person doesn't get a bad reputation.
Seriously, I definitely recognise some of the great features in Rails, but people just need to realise, that it HAS faults, and not argument against every single of these found. - infradead, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0OMFG!!! A point-by-point repudiation! I love those!
- thundercleese, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0> What's wrong with just writing your own code by hand?
> posted by Seumas (1) at 09:07 PM 2/16/06
Nothing wrong with coding by hand if your trying to learn a language. After that it's your time and money. That's why people are excited about RoR...It saves time in development and maintenance, which in turn saves money. - tjogin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Jesus Christ people, can't you read? Joel did not write the rant -- some random anonymous guy in his FORUMS did. And yes, that random anonymous guy didn't understand the first thing about Rails, no wonder it didn't work very well for him.
- orsoihaveheard, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Rails cures AIDS.
- loljews, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1"Great response. It's unfortunate that a poorly written rant filled with misinformation can make it to the front page of digg."
What do you think this is.. it's digg aka slashdot for mormons err morons. And slashdot is filled with morons so you get the dumbest of the dumb. It's like in spaceballs when dark helmet realizes he's surrounded by guys with the last name '*****', "Keep firing *****!". - serra, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0Nice with the alliteration on the headline.
---------------------------------------------------
http://fuh-q.com - Burmask, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0Here's a cookie. Now, how about doing something productive?
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is