[DanielBMarkham]

Hmmmm.

There is a difference between over-hyped and having a bitch-fest about things your boss thought was cool. Very sorry you had to do too much UML on that last project but it works very well for what it is: a universal way of diagramming parts of computer systems for purposes of communicating about them. Probably not so good as a universal spec system, or a runnable model, or any one of the 17 other things folks thought they could do with it. Same goes for a lot of this other stuff. We confuse the environment around a tool or technology with the tech itself.

Everything is overhyped. We're like that: we want magic bullets to fix all of our problems. Everything is over-applied and over-promised.

The more I think about it, the more this is a really bad, perhaps trollish, question. It does nothing to increase people's understanding, and only serves to have a place to gripe and complain. Nothing wrong with griping or complaining! As long as we all realize how subjective it is. This question assumes that there is some objective standard for being over-hyped. I don't think that premise is true. You end up with a bunch of people arguing over whether chocolate ice cream tastes good or not.

[srbloom]

I think the way people are responding isn't helping this question. This could have been good if responders had elaborated on what was promised vs what was delivered, but instead they just list the technology and write, essentially, "this was overhyped".

[mduerksen]

I agree. It's exactly that question (promise vs. delivery and costs) which should be thoroughly explored before utilizing any technology that is advocated. That's the only way to not fall for a hollow hype.

[Semiapies]

Sorry, meant to upvote.