Skip to main content

The Untouchables

There are some technologies that have such strong "street cred", they are effectively untouchable. Anyone who dares imply that they are deficient in any way is instantly labelled an uneducated moron. It is impossible to have a realistic conversation about these technologies, and it's not very common for enthusiasts of these technologies to admit their failings. Let me give some examples:

  • Linux is the best operating system.
  • Common Lisp is the best programming language ever invented.
  • Haskell code is shorter, more elegant, and more correct than code written in any other language.
  • Emacs is the best editor for real programmers.
  • Apple creates the most user friendly user-interfaces.
  • Tiling window managers lead to the highest degree of user productivity.
  • Ruby on Rails is the best web framework written in any language.
  • The only way to write good software that meets its users needs and is delivered on time is to embrace agile software development and use test-driven development.

Of course, there are problems with each of these things:

  • It can be very difficult to get hardware accelerated 3D, wireless drivers, and suspend working reliably in Linux depending on the hardware you have and which version of which distro you are using.
  • Common Lisp has a lot of historical baggage, and it lacks the breadth of community library support that some languages such as Python, Ruby, and C have.
  • Haskell code can be very terse, and advanced Haskell code can be difficult for even intermediate Haskell programmers to understand.
  • IntelliJ has many advantages over Emacs when it comes to editing Java.
  • Not everyone prefers Apple user interfaces. My wife always complains when I make her use OS X.
  • Many of the tiling window manager fans that I know spend an inordinate amount of time configuring and tweaking their window manager, presumably because it doesn't yet do exactly what they want.
  • Ruby on Rails isn't the best approach for real-time applications or applications that must have very, very low latency.
  • Agile software development is not a good fit when it is impossible to iterate, such as when you're building software that must be completely done and completely correct the first time it is used (e.g. pacemakers and satellite software).

There are also some technologies that have such negative street cred that it's difficult to praise them in certain circles. For instance:

  • It can be hard for a Linux advocate to admit that Microsoft has ever done anything good or innovative.
  • It can be difficult for a Python or Ruby enthusiast to admit that Java has any advantages whatsoever.

Linux, Common Lisp, Haskell, Emacs, Apple, tiling window managers, Ruby on Rails, agile, and TDD each have amazing amounts of street cred, and I've spent a lot of time learning playing with all of them. What I discovered is that the world isn't always so black-and-white. It's really helpful when people can honestly admit the weaknesses in technologies they like as well as the strengths in technologies they don't like. I'm not saying that all technologies are equally good. I'm just saying that it would help if we could be more realistic.

Comments

Anonymous said…
tl;dr: don't listen to fanboys, don't feed the trolls.
jjinux said…
Yep, exactly :)
Moandji Ezana said…
It'snot impossible to iterate on pacemakers or satellites. It's just that those iterations aren't "released". But every failing prototype is aniteration
jjinux said…
> It'snot impossible to iterate on pacemakers or satellites. It's just that those iterations aren't "released". But every failing prototype is aniteration

I think life is different when you really only get one shot. For instance, the designs used for the most recent Mars Rover landing systems were completely different that what they used before. If every iteration involves a completely new design done by completely new teams, it's not really agile.

I think doing pace makers is different too. We like to say "release early and often". With pace makers, you really don't want to release until you're damn sure it's not going to kill somebody ;)
Anonymous said…
Saw this via DZone via CodeProject Daily and really enjoyed it! As an example, I really like Agile and have been involved in several projects using this method.

However I was recently involved in an Agile project on a legacy application. Ugh. All I can say is Agile works great for new development but is basically just a goal-oriented task coordinator when you're working on a legacy project. It often gives product owners the opportunity to skip the business analysis that's needed to avoid problems later in the project. And when a delivery date's looming, the process deteriorates rapidly.

Oh, and QA STILL gets squeezed at the end. So what else is new?

Popular posts from this blog

Ubuntu 20.04 on a 2015 15" MacBook Pro

I decided to give Ubuntu 20.04 a try on my 2015 15" MacBook Pro. I didn't actually install it; I just live booted from a USB thumb drive which was enough to try out everything I wanted. In summary, it's not perfect, and issues with my camera would prevent me from switching, but given the right hardware, I think it's a really viable option. The first thing I wanted to try was what would happen if I plugged in a non-HiDPI screen given that my laptop has a HiDPI screen. Without sub-pixel scaling, whatever scale rate I picked for one screen would apply to the other. However, once I turned on sub-pixel scaling, I was able to pick different scale rates for the internal and external displays. That looked ok. I tried plugging in and unplugging multiple times, and it didn't crash. I doubt it'd work with my Thunderbolt display at work, but it worked fine for my HDMI displays at home. I even plugged it into my TV, and it stuck to the 100% scaling I picked for the othe

ERNOS: Erlang Networked Operating System

I've been reading Dreaming in Code lately, and I really like it. If you're not a dreamer, you may safely skip the rest of this post ;) In Chapter 10, "Engineers and Artists", Alan Kay, John Backus, and Jaron Lanier really got me thinking. I've also been thinking a lot about Minix 3 , Erlang , and the original Lisp machine . The ideas are beginning to synthesize into something cohesive--more than just the sum of their parts. Now, I'm sure that many of these ideas have already been envisioned within Tunes.org , LLVM , Microsoft's Singularity project, or in some other place that I haven't managed to discover or fully read, but I'm going to blog them anyway. Rather than wax philosophical, let me just dump out some ideas: Start with Minix 3. It's a new microkernel, and it's meant for real use, unlike the original Minix. "This new OS is extremely small, with the part that runs in kernel mode under 4000 lines of executable code.&quo

Haskell or Erlang?

I've coded in both Erlang and Haskell. Erlang is practical, efficient, and useful. It's got a wonderful niche in the distributed world, and it has some real success stories such as CouchDB and jabber.org. Haskell is elegant and beautiful. It's been successful in various programming language competitions. I have some experience in both, but I'm thinking it's time to really commit to learning one of them on a professional level. They both have good books out now, and it's probably time I read one of those books cover to cover. My question is which? Back in 2000, Perl had established a real niche for systems administration, CGI, and text processing. The syntax wasn't exactly beautiful (unless you're into that sort of thing), but it was popular and mature. Python hadn't really become popular, nor did it really have a strong niche (at least as far as I could see). I went with Python because of its elegance, but since then, I've coded both p