X-Received: by 10.224.110.68 with SMTP id m4mr1996618qap.2.1362759543016; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 08:19:03 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.49.120.67 with SMTP id la3mr188980qeb.12.1362759542996; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 08:19:02 -0800 (PST) Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!dd2no8270002qab.0!news-out.google.com!o5ni47qas.0!nntp.google.com!dd2no8270001qab.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 08:19:02 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=70.196.128.208; posting-account=h3aEwQoAAACiuqX-oR3gvCVFm8lLHoWj NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.196.128.208 References: <2fc87695-9d0b-45b3-ae96-98e0591b30a0@googlegroups.com> <3d9fe0b2-7931-4ab6-8929-235460729c64@q9g2000pbf.googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <9748aa63-9b06-4b75-8881-bda43f7c6d4e@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django? From: Rick Johnson Injection-Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2013 16:19:03 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:40864 On Thursday, March 7, 2013 10:50:52 PM UTC-6, rh wrote: > Choices are good. [...] Having one choice is a mess. And > look back at history and current events Sometimes "choices" are forced upon you without your consent or even withou= t regard for the end users' well-being. In this case "choices" are no longe= r "choices", they become unnecessary dead weight on the backs of users, the= y become malevolent multiplicities. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Take cell phones for example.=20 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Nobody would argue that having many different cell phones available in the = marketplace, each with different capabilities, is a good thing; however, on= e of the downsides is that the manufactures refuse to comply with universal= standards for things like "charger receptacles" and so you end up needing = to buy a new charger for every new phone.=20 I have a box in one of my closets with probably 20 of them, and they're all= different! Some have the same receptacle, but different output. Many are e= ven from the same damn manufacturers and not transferable between different= models of the same manufacture!!! *Wise observer blubbered:* "Rick, what you describe is more a result of cor= porate greed than a good analogy for the ills of web programming, this is o= pen source software, nobody is being paid. The developers are not intending= to extort the lemmings under the guise of a self-induced hardware incompat= ibility ." Yes you are correct, the motivation to fragment is not due to greedy wishes= to become rich, no, the motivation is one of these two: * Selfishness: (They want to create something is "new", but really just the same old $hit with a different name) * Static stubbornness of current module developers does not allow for change, so they are forced to start a=20 new project. =20 Either excuse causes damaging fragmentation of the community and the proble= m. It injects multiplicity and asininity. The so called "choices" (which ar= e really the same thing with a a shiny new name tag) then become an obstacl= e for new users. The whole system slows to crawl, stagnates, and inevitably= becomes extinct. This is the future of Python web programming (and the language itself) if w= e keep refusing to change from within. Fragmentation WILL destroy us.