damn ... was refusing to post for a while there I'd given up and posted it ... ummm, elsewhere ... then went back, back, back, back and tried it again ... it worked ... won't do that again.

Dood, wtf are you talking about?

huh ???

...


dunno, why?

Joel annoys me, but I understand why he would want his own language.  He's being a hypocrite, but anyway.

I am of the belief that if you have a product that changes, updates, upgrades constantly, that focuses on a niche market with niche concerns, you are better off, usually, spending the time to write a little language that speaks to your domain. It makes for faster development in the long run.

If I were him, I would have hoped to have written such a domain language in a functional programming language.  It is a lot easier to write programs that write themselves, in languages that will allow you to write code constructs that themselves are based on dynamically created code constructs.

"spending the time to write a little language that speaks to your domain"

It doesn't really speak his domain though, does it.

I'm not going to knock his solution to the problem of selling a product that needs to be a native web application on Windows (ASP) and a native web application on Unix (PHP).  The Windows people don't want to install PHP and the Unix people don't want to install ASP.

Yeah, Ruby would have been a bad solution. He would have zero install base.

And Joel's "install base" argument is pure crap.  If deployment environment is a serious consideration, erm, Java has pretty effectively solved that problem.  Already have a web container?  Great, here's the WAR file.  No container?  No problem, here's a little installer bundle with tomcat included that took one of my brilliant interns 2 hours to put together.

Java? WTF are you talking about? Do you know of any web hosts that let you run Java? ASP, PHP, and that's about it.

"If deployment environment is a serious consideration, erm, Java has pretty effectively solved that problem."

WHAT?!?  Windows people won't install PHP but you think they'll install Java.  That's fucked up.  Linux people aren't so fond of Java either...  You really don't get it.

Ummm, it's a fucking issue tracker, people.  Which means development shops.  It's also a commercial, costs-money issue tracker.  Which means development shops with money.  Which means they can buy, and host, an issue tracker like, oh fuck, Idaknow... Jira?
Now, you're telling me that these dev shops are unable and/or unwilling to host their own damned issue tracker?  Then they deserve what they get.

I actually bought and used FogBugz.

Installing would have been easy to do on IIS/Windows
But little trivial things like installing PHP might have stopped the sys admin from allowing it on the server.

"But little trivial things like installing PHP might have stopped the sys admin from allowing it on the server."

Sharky's right, but man that is so sad...

Funny thing is, Citi was a JSP shop. Or at least my neck of the woods. PHP and ASP were out of the question for most projects, and any server that had them installed was probably iffy. I remember the guy from the datacenter came & talked to us one day and said "That old box in the corner? That's yours? I'm amazed that thing still runs. I was about to throw it out."

Now THAT'S technological racism!
;-)

"Now, you're telling me that these dev shops are unable and/or unwilling to host their own damned issue tracker?" 

You have no real life experience, do you?

Lets face it, the less dependancies that Fogbugz has the more it will sell.  PHP on Windows is a dependancy.  Java is the dependancy from hell.

At the risk of being rude, Joel is a pompous ass and hasn't said anything interesting for years. He's now also plainly gone completely insane, and the poor old dear should be taken out and shot...
Mat Hall on September 12, 2006 05:03 PM

http://www.codinghorror.com/mtype/mt-comments-renamed.cgi?__mode=red&id=13704

Ohh man, that was rude.

Lol now that I'm reading that page, everyone on CoT went there to comment.

Joel bashing at its purest.

I wonder where Mat got his styleized Mat.

http://www.dashslot.co.uk/

"You have no real life experience, do you? "
Yeah, none.  That's why I'm a senior engineer at a name-brand company. ;-)

Seriously, feel free to disagree, but what's with the ad hominem attacks?  In general, it's not at all a surprise that lower dependency == more sales potential.  But there's more to the story.  Like I said: Joel's target is dev shops willing and able to part with cash for bug tracking.  Given that, there may indeed be some shops that fit into that category while simultaneously being so incompetent and so poorly run that they can't host their own issue tracking.  Fair enough; let's assume that's the case.  But so what?  Are those customers even worth having?  Would the sales gains be offset by inordiante support requests from the cluetards?

Not having done a detailed market and revenue survey, I don't know for sure.  I doubt that anyone else here knows any more than I do on this score.

I think Wasabi is Joel's Bedazzler. He scored major points once with a "write instead of buy" decision, so he's convinced it's the only possible option now.

Oh, and:
"PHP on Windows is a dependancy.  Java is the dependancy from hell."

Setting up, and securing, PHP on a Windows box is *kinda* a pain in the ass, but it's far from difficult.  And Java is laughably trivial to install.  I fail to see what the problem is.

"Seriously, feel free to disagree, but what's with the ad hominem attacks?"

I haven't done one in SO long and I toss one in just to be colorful and I get called on it.  That's so unfair.

"Like I said: Joel's target is dev shops willing and able to part with cash for bug tracking."

It's really not that expensive of an application.  It's a couple hundred bucks to throw on a server to keep the developers happy.

"simultaneously being so incompetent and so poorly run that they can't host their own issue tracking."

Umm..  I've been talking about companies who ARE hosting their own bug tracking.  Just because they host it themselves doesn't mean they want to around installing PHP or Ruby or (god forbid) Java!  You have far too much faith in sysadmins.

"Are those customers even worth having?  Would the sales gains be offset by inordiante support requests from the cluetards?"

Isn't the whole point of having no dependencies to keep the support requests down?

If I ever met a sysadmin unwilling to install Java on an internal server, I'd fire the dork straightaway.  Good thing I have hire/fire authority.

"Setting up, and securing, PHP on a Windows box is *kinda* a pain in the ass, but it's far from difficult."

It has NOTHING to do with difficult.  You want to get approval to install some freeware open source product on a server?  Ha. 

If you don't have these problems, Mr. Senior Engineer, your name brand company must be a great place to work for.

If I ever met a sysadmin willing to install Java on anything anywhere I'd have him shot dead.  But then, maybe I'm overly harsh.

"your name brand company must be a great place to work for."
It is.  It's awesome.

And you've got spunk, kid: wanna job?  We're hiring.

I'm afraid I'm too indespensible to leave any of my jobs right now.

"You want to get approval to install some freeware open source product on a server?  Ha."
And this has exactly *what* to do with Java?

Nothing.  It has to do with PHP just like you were talking about in what I quoted.  Pay attention!

Fine.  I give up.

I win!

> Setting up, and securing, PHP on a Windows box is
> *kinda* a pain in the ass, but it's far from difficult

It's a huge pain in the ass. Please. I wanted to scream while trying to get php discussion crap working.