Ruby momentum?

[Zach Dennis]

I'm an outsider to the Ruby community. I've used it a time or two,
mostly to get familiar with it. I've read part of the PickAxe, but my
job (Java) keeps me in Java-land. I'm wondering what those of you using
Ruby feel are Ruby's chances of taking off. At least to the extent that
you could begin to see it used in places where J2EE is being used
currently. I know this is already happening. But my question is more
with regards to the future. Is something like RoR worth learning in the
context of being able to actually put it to use in the future?

We are in development for a multi-million dollar system for a Fortune
1000 company. The backend of this system will utilize RoR heavily. The
system utilizes a front-end java client, but we scrapped all J2EE /
Hibernate plans for the backend when we did a small test between
different backend solutions. The test was a small backend with
web-functionality, database mapping, data processing, etc... with
different Java solutions (standalone JSP/Hibernate), (standalone
JSP/Java-Mysql adapter), (JBoss,J2EE/Hibernate/Tomcat) and then we tried
Rails. The results were that in the days in took to complete the tests
in Java, it took under a few hours with Ruby On Rails. From that point
on we have been moving forward with Ruby, and Ruby on Rails. We will be
moving into benchmarking and optimization in the next 2-4 weeks, I can
keep the ML posted with benchmarks.

I know
I'm asking for conjecture. And that's all I expect. But not being
actively involved in the community, I get no sense as to how much
momentum Ruby has, and thus what the chances of it becoming more
commonly used, are.

At work I'm in a lucky position to pick the technology that works for
our company and our customers. I have been using ruby for the past 2
years almost. I have used ruby for lots of odds and ends things during
that time. As I get more verbosed in ruby as a language I find that I
can do more and more things with ruby. I now...
- use Ruby On Rails for internal web site development and customer
web-site development
- use ActiveRecord for database mapping even when no web interface is
involved. This is a huge time saver!
- use net/ssh to handle automating remote administration tasks for me
- use win32ole to access the WScript (Windows Script Host) object model
- use wxRuby to write timer/reminder programs for myself which alert
me in 15 minutes before a meeting, appointment, etc...
- used the socket library to write a customer's messenging system
which will be used to allow multiple servers inside of an environment to
communicate with one another with hardly any overhead.
- use IRB sooo much, well IRB is the best tool in the world. There is
no ther like it!
- used JRuby to communicate ruby code to Java applications
- write commandline utilities suite for 4D WebSTAR (Mac OSX Application)
- use rubyscript2exe to make clickable installers, uninstallers, and
applications

And the list keeps going. Ruby is my #1 tool of choice. As I continue to
verse myself in Ruby and it's uses I will continue to see different
arena's where I can use Ruby. This grows almost everyday.

Ruby is also a big time saver for me. I can write ruby code faster then
any other language. Coworkers, employees and my boss have been pleased
and surprised with the turnaround time I have for getting things done.
Am I the best programmer in the world? Probably not (dont tell my
employees that =), but I know how and when to use Ruby. 75% of our small
development team now uses ruby on a daily basis, by choice. =)

You can only learn to make good decisions about when and how to use
Ruby, by using Ruby.

I know Java has a head start and has the backing of many large
corporations, so it's perhaps not an apt comparison to make.

Java is good for certain things. Java is not good for everything. Ruby
is the same way. I just find that where these overlap Ruby usually wins
the war! And yes this is even considering Eclipse and Intellityping!

But I like And I like the philosophy of Ruby.
the language.

Me to. =)

To what extent this is
translating into projects and jobs, however, I have no idea.

I have no idea on this either. A year ago I was the only person I knew
or could find in a 600,000 people city who knew what Ruby was. In the
past 2 months I have found 10 people who know Ruby, plus a company which
is know dictating Ruby On Rails as a doctrinal belief to it's employees,
and that company is not the one I am at. Ruby is growing, people using
ruby are what make ruby grow. As ruby usage and awareness grows it will
provide itself with an environment which will allow itself to strengthen
it's presence as a viable tool and that will allow it's community of
users to survive throughout the fiscal year.

The only thing that will stop Ruby from growing is if people don't use
ruby. If you use ruby, that is a +1 chance that Ruby will be used at a
company; small, medium, large or huge later this year.

Zach

 

[gregarican]

The only thing that will stop Ruby from growing is if people don't use
ruby. If you use ruby, that is a +1 chance that Ruby will be used at a
company; small, medium, large or huge later this year.

Very true. For larger companies there are typically some PHB's that
look at the current popular technology trends and hop on those
bandwagons. "Let's see...what's the other guy using? Well, if it's good
enough for them we can certainly use it!" Especially since the
technology spending is still probably overall nowhere near where it was
pre-Y2K. Leaders don't want to spend money on hardware, software, or
development/support manhours unless absolutely necessary and proven.
Hopefully stories like yours where Fortune 1000 companies start to
adopt Ruby will catch on and the domino effect will take place.

At my small company I have employed Ruby for everything under the sun
(from admin scripts to office automation to GUI apps) and will likely
replace more old ASP/IIS functions with Rails/Apache as the year winds
up. But at larger companies sometimes it's more difficult to throw the
switch. I recall back in 1997 working for a major cellular company as
IT Field Manager of one of their call centers. Then I started
installing Linux boxes running MySQL to test a replacement for some old
clunky help desk app they had already in place. That didn't go over too
well if memory serves correct Even bringing up a Linux box on the
LAN set off red flags. "Linux, what the hell is that? We use Solaris on
Sun boxes after all."

 

[Kirk Haines]

Hopefully stories like yours where Fortune 1000 companies start to
adopt Ruby will catch on and the domino effect will take place.

The lion's share of my income comes from work that I do for a Fortune 500
company, and it is all implemented in Ruby. Whether this is important or
not, though, I think is in the eye of the beholder. I do the work on a
contract basis, and provide services on a contract basis, and the companies
that I work for don't seem to care much how their projects are implemented,
so long as they come in on time and on budget, with the feature set
requested. And using Ruby lets me accomplish this in very competetive
timeframes.


Kirk Haines

 

[Devin Mullins]

Where I work (and I imagine most places), they don't bring developers on
a project until *after* the technology decisions have been made. (Well,
there was a market evaluation project about 3-4 years ago that made all
the decisions.) On my interview with the PM of a greenfield project, I
saw on her computer screen in the background completed order forms for
the J2EE application server, the database, and have a strong hunch that
we'll be tied to a particular framework, too. Given that ordering things
takes time, it makes sense to get this done before you have developers,
so that they're not twiddling their thumbs, but hey, we might've been
able to save them some time and money by suggesting a free platform
(Tomcat & Postgres or, gasp, RoR*).

What is it going to take for us to adopt it? My guess: Skunkworks. Some
tiny, rogue development team manages to use RoR simply because they're a
blip in upper management's radar, and does something really successful
(though small) as a result. Then, they go on tour throughout the
building, presenting and such. Unfortunately, I'm not working for that
tiny, rogue development team.

Devin

*Actually when I've mentioned Ruby at work it's inspired more often a
chuckle than a gasp. It's partly because they know how difficult it is
to get new technologies (well, new anything) adopted there, but I think
it's partly because it sounds like hype to them.** It'd be less of a
problem if the bureaucracy was this adversarial system against which the
agile development shops would try to push back, but, sadly, the
bureaucracy seems to have permeated the culture.

**Well, okay, there are a few that were, however, really interested in it.

 

[tsuraan]

*Actually when I've mentioned Ruby at work it's inspired more often a

chuckle than a gasp. It's partly because they know how difficult it is
to get new technologies (well, new anything) adopted there, but I think
it's partly because it sounds like hype to them.**

I'd have to say that all the "RoR 10x faster than Java" articles are
really giving rails a bit of a bad name. Around here, RoR is somewhat
of a joke, just because of all these claims of whiter teeth, bigger
smiles, cleaner floors, etc, that Rails will bring. It just makes the
whole framework seem like an enourmous marketing effort, which to many
technical people indicates a lack of quality. I'm sure that if we
gave Rails a try here, it would be quickly accepted, but breaking
through the cynicism is really hard when a product is being so heavily
hyped.

 

[David Heinemeier Hansson]

I'd have to say that all the "RoR 10x faster than Java" articles are

really giving rails a bit of a bad name. Around here, RoR is somewhat
of a joke, just because of all these claims of whiter teeth, bigger
smiles, cleaner floors, etc, that Rails will bring. It just makes the
whole framework seem like an enourmous marketing effort, which to many
technical people indicates a lack of quality. I'm sure that if we
gave Rails a try here, it would be quickly accepted, but breaking
through the cynicism is really hard when a product is being so heavily
hyped.

There's no doubt that breaking through the awareness barrier leaves a
residue of backlash with some. I wrote about this subject and some of
the ecosystem numbers at http://www.loudthinking.com/arc/000484.html
--=20
David Heinemeier Hansson
http://www.loudthinking.com -- Broadcasting Brain
http://www.basecamphq.com -- Online project management
http://www.backpackit.com -- Personal information manager
http://www.rubyonrails.com -- Web-application framework

 

[Kirk Haines]

I'd have to say that all the "RoR 10x faster than Java" articles are
really giving rails a bit of a bad name. Around here, RoR is somewhat
of a joke, just because of all these claims of whiter teeth, bigger
smiles, cleaner floors, etc, that Rails will bring. It just makes the
whole framework seem like an enourmous marketing effort, which to many
technical people indicates a lack of quality. I'm sure that if we
gave Rails a try here, it would be quickly accepted, but breaking
through the cynicism is really hard when a product is being so heavily
hyped.

This is something of a mixed bag. Rails has been marketed very heavily, true.
The name is all over the place, and has been for quite a while, and many of
the claims, taken individually, are quite open to attack and criticism.
However, at the same time, hasn't that marketing also worked quite
successfully?

If RoR had not been hyped like this, would your Java shop know about it at
all? Would there be an enthusiastic crowd developing for it, and a much
larger enthusiastic crowd buying books about it and using it?

Probably not.

So, although there is a _definite_ negative side to DHH's marketing style, and
it definitely turns some segment of the audience off, I can't sit here as an
observer and conclude that the style is anything but a success for him.


Kirk Haines

 

[gregarican]

but breaking through the cynicism is really hard when a product is being so heavily hyped.

I tend to agree. After doing a couple of projects using Rails I am
getting to really like it and feel that it helps me use my time more
productively. But I must say honestly I don't think it's 100% ready for
prime time in terms of larger scale deployments. In my opinion I think
it needs another year or so of development and usage under its belt.
It's like if I was going to pitch Linux as the be-all-end-all back when
I first started using it back in 1997 at the 2.0.34 kernel level. With
the distro packages available for it at the time it's not like I was
going to throw a new mySQL database out there for heavy CRUD
transactional loads and end up replacing our Oracle 7.3 server. Give it
time.

Now Ruby, on the other hand, is definitely ready for prime time. That's
why I love seeing it catch on and folks getting to appreciate all it
delivers...

 

[tsuraan]

This is something of a mixed bag. Rails has been marketed very heavily, =
true.

The name is all over the place, and has been for quite a while, and many = of
the claims, taken individually, are quite open to attack and criticism.
However, at the same time, hasn't that marketing also worked quite
successfully?

Getting the word out is definitely good, and perhaps having some
controversy over the thing does help, but it seems to be raising the
barrier to acceptance. I'd love to see straightforward comparisons
and even some reasonable testimonials, but the gushing is just getting
silly. I don't blame the Rails people for this; I think it's just
some people who really do believe that they've found the holy grail
and are very excited about that. It just makes it a bit difficult to
take rails seriously.

If RoR had not been hyped like this, would your Java shop know about it a= t
all? Would there be an enthusiastic crowd developing for it, and a much
larger enthusiastic crowd buying books about it and using it?

Not a Java shop (thank god

Probably not.

I've been on the Ruby list since before Rails was released (as far as
I know), so I probably would know about it, but I do get the point.=20
The news articles certainly are bringing people in, it seems.

 

[Kirk Haines]

barrier to acceptance. I'd love to see straightforward comparisons
and even some reasonable testimonials, but the gushing is just getting
silly. I don't blame the Rails people for this; I think it's just

I've wanted to do an article (or, more likely, a series of a few articles)
like this for some time, comparing a handful of frameworks in a way that
attempts to be meaningful and objective and educational. The intent would be
to clarify rather than to advertise.

Kind of like my post the other day about that question about creating HTML
pages to edit database records that contain to_many relationships, but
expanded to include fully equivalent examples.

I've wanted to do this for many, many months, but I lack the Rails or Nitro
knowledge, doing all of my work with IOWA, myself. And, to be of value, I
think it'd be interesting to include one non-Ruby solution. Take the market
leading Java approach and include it in the comparison, too.


Kirk Haines

 

[gwtmp01]

This is something of a mixed bag. Rails has been marketed very
heavily, true.

Compared to what? There are certainly quite a few vocal advocates
for Rails but the hype/buzz/interest seems to be of a different
quality than the type of "heavy marketing" that is usually associated
with
large corporate PR departments. It seems to me more of a grass-roots
buzz to me than any sort of orchestrated campaign. I'd expect
David and company to be advocating their technology but I think there is
more going on than that.

Once I see RoR mentioned in Business Week, I'll consider it being
"heavily marketed".


Gary Wright

 

[James Britt]

...
This is something of a mixed bag. Rails has been marketed very heavily, true.
The name is all over the place, and has been for quite a while, and many of
the claims, taken individually, are quite open to attack and criticism.
However, at the same time, hasn't that marketing also worked quite
successfully?

Successfully as compared to what? As with some other Rails hype, there
is no real way to prove or disprove the assertion.

If RoR had not been hyped like this, would your Java shop know about it at
all? Would there be an enthusiastic crowd developing for it, and a much
larger enthusiastic crowd buying books about it and using it?

Probably not.

Why not? There are numerous simple, factual claims one can make about
RoR that would have no problem getting anyone's attention.

The constant repetition in any available venue, the carpet bombing of /.
threads, these get attention. And, while potentially annoying, constant
promotion while sticking to facts would not be so blatantly alienating.

So, although there is a _definite_ negative side to DHH's marketing style, and
it definitely turns some segment of the audience off, I can't sit here as an
observer and conclude that the style is anything but a success for him.

Not sure how turning people off from Ruby and the Ruby community is a
success for anyone. Maybe it's a matter of numbers; lose some folks,
but gain many more. I have a hard time believing Ruby and Rails need
churlish trash talk or extravagant, unverifiable claims to be
successful, or that many in the Ruby community want to this as a means
of promotion. It's what (supposedly) sets this community apart.

James

--

http://www.ruby-doc.org - The Ruby Documentation Site
http://www.rubyxml.com - News, Articles, and Listings for Ruby & XML
http://www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
http://www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys

 

[Kirk Haines]

Compared to what? There are certainly quite a few vocal advocates
for Rails but the hype/buzz/interest seems to be of a different
quality than the type of "heavy marketing" that is usually associated
with
large corporate PR departments. It seems to me more of a grass-roots
buzz to me than any sort of orchestrated campaign. I'd expect
David and company to be advocating their technology but I think there is
more going on than that.

I think the initial efforts were pretty well planned and orchestrated by
DHH, though only he could say for certain. He started teasing it here long
before it was released, and if one went and did some googling back then (I
did), one found mentions of it in about every topically relevant blog that I
could find.

Once I see RoR mentioned in Business Week, I'll consider it being
"heavily marketed".

Well, DHH doesn't have the budget Sun does. If he did, I expect the marketing
would not be quite so grass-roots. That's one thing that I respect about the
guy. He has a great deal of marketing/promotional accumen, IMHO.

Back to my main point, though. I don't disagree that they hype has turned
people off. But it has also turned people on. It's a strategy, and current
evidence suggests that it has been a successful strategy.


Kirk Haines

 

[gregarican]

It's a strategy, and current evidence suggests that it has been a successful strategy.

True. This might be stretching some but I think some FOSS proponents
deep-down like their interests and techology more obscure. The appeal
is there because it's a tightly guarded secret. I know there are some
newbies to the computing world who steer away from Microsoft just
because they are the big bully and these newbies would rather root for
David as the underdog than side with a Goliath. Even while they are
vainly trying to recompile a kernel to get their sound card to work.
Just kidding

I can concur on many levels with these folks, however. There's a
certain underdog mentality that views popularity as selling out. Maybe
some of these folks don't like seeing Rails being on the tip of
everyone's tongue because a percentage of its praise is being sung by
folks just aboard a bandwagon. And these bandwaggoners would jump ship
when another newly touted solution starts getting talked about...

 

[Kirk Haines]

Successfully as compared to what? As with some other Rails hype, there
is no real way to prove or disprove the assertion.

Successful as compared to many, many open source projects that have something
good to recommend them, but never see daylight outside of smaller communities
of users.

Why not? There are numerous simple, factual claims one can make about
RoR that would have no problem getting anyone's attention.

I'm not disputing that.

Not sure how turning people off from Ruby and the Ruby community is a
success for anyone. Maybe it's a matter of numbers; lose some folks,

I don't think _any_ strategy is going to be 100% successful. A lower key
approach may, for instance, attract fewer people, but negatively influence
fewer people, as well. David's approach is a more emotionally charged one.

but gain many more. I have a hard time believing Ruby and Rails need
churlish trash talk or extravagant, unverifiable claims to be
successful, or that many in the Ruby community want to this as a means
of promotion. It's what (supposedly) sets this community apart.

And to be clear, I am in a it of a devil's advocate position here. I'm not a
fan of the way these things have been promoted personally, and I personally
don't use Rails both for personal and for technical reasons (it wouldn't work
for what I do). But I do respect David's accomplishments. I do think that
in the long run there's a lot more good than harm to come from his
strategies, even though I can quibble with how well I like or dislike the
specific strategies, and I do think there are things that can be learned from
both the successes and the failures of those strategies.

As a discussion of advertising, it boils down to whether fostering strong
emotional reactions, sometimes well beyond what facts can support, is a valid
approach or not.

As a Ruby discussion, though, I think it's important to look past all of that
to the reason why so many people who have never touched Ruby before are
liking Rails. It's not because of Rails, itself. It's because of Ruby.
Rails has some magic and convenience and nifty things to make the developer's
life simpler, but it's the Ruby that converts these PHP and Java guys to
using it. And when they show off their accomplishments to others, it's the
Ruby that's going to hook them as well, and I think that's a win for
everyone, even if the walk to get there was filled with some exaggerated
emotionalism.


Kirk Haines

 

[James Britt]

Kirk Haines wrote:
...

And to be clear, I am in a it of a devil's advocate position here. I'm not a
fan of the way these things have been promoted personally, and I personally
don't use Rails both for personal and for technical reasons (it wouldn't work
for what I do). But I do respect David's accomplishments. I do think that
in the long run there's a lot more good than harm to come from his
strategies, even though I can quibble with how well I like or dislike the
specific strategies, and I do think there are things that can be learned from
both the successes and the failures of those strategies.

I tend to agree, and it's hard to argue given that many many people, in
a crowded, ADD-wrought environment are talking about Ruby. Hell, I get
paid to use RoR. I like that. But when I hear from people who have
been put off of Rails and Ruby because of the hype then some community
reflection and discussion is in order.

As a discussion of advertising, it boils down to whether fostering strong
emotional reactions, sometimes well beyond what facts can support, is a valid
approach or not.

As a Ruby discussion, though, I think it's important to look past all of that
to the reason why so many people who have never touched Ruby before are
liking Rails. It's not because of Rails, itself. It's because of Ruby.
Rails has some magic and convenience and nifty things to make the developer's
life simpler, but it's the Ruby that converts these PHP and Java guys to
using it. And when they show off their accomplishments to others, it's the
Ruby that's going to hook them as well, and I think that's a win for
everyone, even if the walk to get there was filled with some exaggerated
emotionalism.

I hope so. What I also hope is that we avoid the Struts/J2EE
phenomenon, where is isn't enough to simply use Java for a project, one
has to use $APPROVED_API_TECHNOLOGY (Struts, Spring, Maven, what have
you).

(Though there are worse things then being told you have to use Rails ...)



James

--

http://www.ruby-doc.org - The Ruby Documentation Site
http://www.rubyxml.com - News, Articles, and Listings for Ruby & XML
http://www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
http://www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys

 

[Zach Dennis]

Getting the word out is definitely good, and perhaps having some
controversy over the thing does help, but it seems to be raising the
barrier to acceptance. I'd love to see straightforward comparisons
and even some reasonable testimonials, but the gushing is just getting
silly.

I did a straightforward comparison between RoR and many differing java
solutions in which led me to my decision to use Rails to be apart of a
current project.

I don't blame the Rails people for this; I think it's just
some people who really do believe that they've found the holy grail
and are very excited about that.

I hope this is not implying anything to those who have posted on this
thread on Rails behalf (like myself). I didn't like Rails along time ago
when I had never *really* used it, and I was just skimming it's surface
moaning and groaning about it's hype. I took the plunge, and so far it's
working well for my company.

It just makes it a bit difficult to
take rails seriously.

Why? Perhaps you have used Rails and it didn't work for you or your
team. Ok, so don't use rails. But, based on what you've said thus far it
seems like you haven't really attempted to use rails. You're opinions
are at 40,000 feet. You are griping about the hype and marketing rails
is getting. So go test out rails then come to an honest conclusion.

Alot of people are critics of the hype and marketing about Rails. Who
cares if a bunch of people love it and think it is their holy grail.
Maybe it is their holy grail for what they do. There is no need to shoot
down someone (or even the idea of something being good) because they
have found something that really works well for them.

Zach

 

[tsuraan]

I did a straightforward comparison between RoR and many differing java

solutions in which led me to my decision to use Rails to be apart of a
current project.

Cool! You should post it or something. Honestly, I do think the more
(unbiased) reviews that are out there, the better informed everyone
will be.

I hope this is not implying anything to those who have posted on this
thread on Rails behalf (like myself). I didn't like Rails along time ago
when I had never *really* used it, and I was just skimming it's surface
moaning and groaning about it's hype. I took the plunge, and so far it's
working well for my company.

I don't have anything against people raving about rails in the
(relative) privacy of this list. It's really to be expected, given
the focus of this community. It's when Rails articles are hitting
high-traffic sites like Slashdot and OSNews that I get worried.=20
People see articles like that and just assume that it's another
vacuous framework with a large marketing machine behind it. It really
does scare a lot of people off, or at least make it far harder to
convince them to give Rails a shot.

Why? Perhaps you have used Rails and it didn't work for you or your
team. Ok, so don't use rails. But, based on what you've said thus far it
seems like you haven't really attempted to use rails. You're opinions
are at 40,000 feet. You are griping about the hype and marketing rails
is getting. So go test out rails then come to an honest conclusion.

I don't think you understand me. I like rails. I want to use rails.=20
Getting my team to try it, when there's so much hype over it, is
really really hard. I'm certainly not an expert in rails; in fact
I've basically just read some tutorials and basic setup stuff. I
still like it enough that I'm trying to use it here, and meeting tons
of resistance due to the effect that the marketing is having on the
people that I work with.

 

[Daniel Brockman]

I know there are some newbies to the computing world who
steer away from Microsoft just because they are the big
bully and these newbies would rather root for David as the
underdog than side with a Goliath.

Haha, excellent pun.

 

[James Britt]

Why? Perhaps you have used Rails and it didn't work for you or your
team. Ok, so don't use rails. But, based on what you've said thus far it
seems like you haven't really attempted to use rails. You're opinions
are at 40,000 feet. You are griping about the hype and marketing rails
is getting. So go test out rails then come to an honest conclusion.

I *think* the point was that the hype made it harder to get others to
take even a first look at Rails.

"Oh, Rails; the code that turns water into wine. Yeah, right."

The other down side, for me, is that I'm beginning to take every
non-negative statement about Rails, even fairly benign ones, with a
large grain of salt.

The hype can foster a sense of mistrust.

James

--

http://www.ruby-doc.org - The Ruby Documentation Site
http://www.rubyxml.com - News, Articles, and Listings for Ruby & XML
http://www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
http://www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys