While Ruby and Rails are slow, the issue is overblown. There is at most an order of magnitude difference between RoR and reasonable alternatives (php, python, etc.), and realistacally the difference is closer to a factor of 3. This might sound important, but there is bigger fish to fry when talking about performance. All of the above are dead slow, 3-4 orders of magnitude slower than optimal C implementation.
In a typical web app, HTTP optimization and doing O(1) queries rather O(n^2) per page is where performance lies. You can develop web apps quickly these days, and the code can be clean, but you end up going from Palo Alto to Menlo Park through Paris. Sure, a supersonic plane can do that route quicker than a handicapped turtle, but the trick is not going through Paris altogether. RoR makes rewring the code to avoid the Paris trip easy, fast and resulting code remains reasonably readable. And that's the holy grail.
Having said that, that 3x performance boost to RoR would sure be nice, and would put more areas of our application into "Roundtrip through Paris OK" category.
Indeed, databases are real root of all performance problems. I rewrote a site to use the database much less frequently (mostly just for the initial loading and write operations) and I've been incredibly satisfied with the results.
If you don't like Ruby no Rails don't use it. There doesn't have to be some religious debate every time someone 'takes it for a spin'. Ruby on Rails makes you more productive, end of story. (Edited to remove unnecessary flame. Sorry about that, it's been a long week.)
No need for personal attacks ("I don't think the authors rip off of hot or not with pictures of kittens is really a good use case for scaling a popular site." in case it disappears).
Also, I'll just point out that there is certainly a religion of RoR unlike that of any other web framework. Thus, whenever someone makes disparaging comments, some RoR fan takes serious offense. You seem like you were personally offended, for example.
I just get tired of everyone that writes a website becoming an authority on all things Internet related. That said, my comment was off the cuff and I'll retract it. I'm sorry if I hurt any feelings.
And I get tired of people with 6 months RoR under their belt proselytizing it as the last word in programming languages. And in regards to the "omg you're just like hot or not!" comment, um, yeah, sure. Keep thinking that. Good.
Fair enough, but I've been using RoR for 2 years and it is amazingly useful. It's a far better web programming environment than php or django. If you didn't like it that's cool, I really don't care, but don't submit your language bashing blog post to newsy. Also, it doesn't really matter if you're a rip off of hot or not as a user that's the first thing I thought as I clicked the back button away from your site.
Geezus, the guy is entitled to an opinion about a technology that he has used to deploy a website. You must really care because you bothered to post some dickish response.
Same here with david. I was attracted to Rails and seeing that it's written in Ruby I decided to take the plunge. I agree with plusBryan that it is important to have many options.
Frameworks have their own strengths and weaknesses inherited from the languages used to build them.
So quit the hating, please I don't get why RoR dudes(not all of them in fairness) love to bash hackers using other languages or frameworks. Although blogs like this tend to bring out alot of passionate if not misguided individuals.
If you actually read the post, you'd see my point is just to warn against the religious fanaticism that surrounds what is essentially a framework. More options are good, right?
I don't think its so much a Rails issue as a Ruby issue. Of late a new breed of Rubyists has emerged, and they are surprisingly militant. Here's hoping its just a phase. More options are indeed good, ands its weird to see the users of a language heavily based off of perl decide that there is indeed only one solution to a problem. ;)
I was attracted to Ruby because of Rails, and while I like it a lot, I'm old enough, I guess, to not really get so wrapped up in any one language. I spent all that energy trying to push Tcl over the years.
Rails is great, though, the only things that seem to come close are the Python frameworks, and I think at that point it comes down to a question of taste, and I think I like Ruby more than Python (even though I've used Python since...'99? Before it was popular in any case).
To counter your argument... I'd say that the new breed of millitant Rubyists has emerged from Rails, rather than the other way around.
That being said, however, the seemingly constant attacks by every person who takes it for a spin and doesn't love every aspect of it does get pretty irritating.
But, I suppose, as long as they're being constructive, no harm done.
I agree that RoR made me productive. I produced so much custom functions (helpers) like never before in any other framework. Especially love pagination.
So, the blogger is building a business for which conceivably he would like to succeed and sell for millions and one of his gripes is that he doesn't want to pay $26 for the Rails book?
Besides the fact that it is a great book and can answer 95% of your Rails questions, I have a hard time taking him seriously with this statement. Can't shell out $26 for a manual to the platform you are basing your business off of?
What next? Are they hosting their site on Geocities?
I also always gripe with Ruby's lack of documentation. It just doesn't feel right. In comparison: I have never spent a dime on a Java book, in the 10 years that I have been using the language. On the other hand, I can't count how often I have downloaded the various available online docs, for example when I did consulting and used the clients computer. I also travel a lot, which has hampered my progress in Ruby (that book is heavy, so it stayed home) - OK, I should have bought the e-book, but still...
26$ is not a lot, but it is a lot if you are not sure if it is worth your money, or if it will fulfill all your needs. Is that the only Ruby book you'll ever need, or are more investments coming up (Rails book(s))? It's all about risks, in a way. Why else use Open Source Software? With Java, I know my needs are taken care of, and if I ever have a problem, I will find the answer for free, and fast.
There are certainly enough examples out there that will get you up and running with Rails and will at the very least allow you to make an appropriate assessment as to whether it will improve your development productivity.
If you're at the point where you're thinking of buying the book my assumption is that you're already passed the point of assessing Rails and are looking to understand the more advanced functionality.
my impression was that likebetter's troubles weren't really problems with rails so much as problems with their hosting co, bandwidth, and maybe the usual db scaling issues. correct me if I'm wrong, though.
"... And there's no documentation to the point of seeming intentional ..."
Python documentation is on my continuous reading list & is one of the pluses for python usage. But lack of it hasn't stopped Rails adoption. Why? Is it that Rails is that simple to use (for experienced developers)?
I don't understand the constant attacks on Rails documentation. There are very few things that I can't find in the documentation provided. Not to mention, if you have a solid knowledge of Ruby, the Rails code itself makes for pretty good documentation.
I think titles like this post deserve a harsh response from Rails enthusiasts. It's meant to provoke, so why complain when the provoked respond passionately? If you so choose, you'll also find a lot of well thought out Rails posters (B. Tate, S. Halloway, D. Thomas, etc).
ah more FUD about Rails, hardly original anymore. If you couldn't manage more than one user you clearly don't know what your doing or were too lazy to try to figure it out.
In a typical web app, HTTP optimization and doing O(1) queries rather O(n^2) per page is where performance lies. You can develop web apps quickly these days, and the code can be clean, but you end up going from Palo Alto to Menlo Park through Paris. Sure, a supersonic plane can do that route quicker than a handicapped turtle, but the trick is not going through Paris altogether. RoR makes rewring the code to avoid the Paris trip easy, fast and resulting code remains reasonably readable. And that's the holy grail.
Having said that, that 3x performance boost to RoR would sure be nice, and would put more areas of our application into "Roundtrip through Paris OK" category.