[tunesmith]

I wonder if a lot of headway could have been made simply by doing some constraint analysis on the Spring framework and figuring out how to improve the performance. I have a hard time believing that Spring itself was completely topped out. It might have been an architectural choice, or some bloat that could have been taken out incrementally.

Instead they seem to be going the route of "the unicorns will solve it". The overall cost of that approach seems higher - finding unicorns is rare. Finding unicorns that are very good at all areas is even harder. I know there are a lot of unicorns on this board, but there sure aren't a lot of unicorn resumes on a hirer's desk.

I think the value of Spring has always been not that it's super-high-performance out of the box, but that it does a lot for you, and that as you learn more and more of it, you can develop solutions fairly quickly. It's built to make it easier on the developer, not the servers - but it is still easy to improve performance by focusing on constraints.

I think it's easy to blame what's between the keyboard and the chair, but the availability of said unicorns is the one ingredient of the system that is not in an employer's control. What is in control is sponsoring more education, and focusing on simplicity and constraint analysis.