| I've got another heresy coming up: Outside of very specific fields, language doesn't matter. I was quite strongly attacked on another thread for implying that WhatsApp is just another CRUD app. The thing was that I wasn't bashing their dev team. They could have done a crazy amazing job, and it helped their company take off, but what was their secret sauce? The ability to have an (almost) free SMS/MMS app which worked the same across all devices and worked with numbers rather than names/userid's, followed by network affects. They could have written it in PHP and have it take off. And a competitor could have written it Haskell and had it fail. (FB is written in PHP, MySpace was written in CF, Friendster was written in jsp, so logically PHP > CF > Friendster. Therefore, PHP > Java. QED?) Twitter didn't fail because it was written in Ruby. It failed because of business. Diaspora isn't FB not because of tech, but because of business. |
Perhaps people disagreed with you because it seems to me that WhatsApp is an outlier where a specific language and runtime (Erlang & OTP) provided a clear advantage in a specific domain (realtime networked messaging). In this specific instance, the language provided facilities that made it easier to solve a specific type of problem than it would have been in other languages. It helped them get to market more quickly, and in that way could have directly contributed to the application's chance of success. I suppose what I'm getting at is that I think there's a decent case to be made that WhatsApp is one of those very specific instances you mentioned where the language is part of the company's secret sauce.
That's still no reason for anyone to attack you, though! It's easy enough to disagree in a friendly way. :)