Comparing technology stacks (of books)
Posted by admin October 28, 2005 @ 08:38 AM
Jon Tirsen is having fun comparing tech stacks:
Ruby on Rails was created by David Heinemeier Hansson, a partner at 37signals,
then extended and improved by a core team of committers and hundreds of open-source contributors.
Rails is released under the MIT license. Ruby under the Ruby License.
"Rails", "Ruby on Rails", and the Rails logo are trademarks of David Heinemeier Hansson. All rights reserved.
|
Sponsored by |
 |
Perfect. (LOL)
So what you’re saying is Java has more features and is better documented?
:)
Or maybe you need too much thinks in java to do a simple shopping cart!
It comes to mind: -“One image worth’s a thousand words !!!”
Where’s my camera when I need it? My colleague has the .NET “stack” and I have the Rails and ruby book, but the camera is at home.
To be completely fair you have to admit there’s a bit of redundancy in the Java stack. Honestly how many ‘core Java’ books are you going to use as reference?
Still an amusing picture.
This is not funny at all! ...But only because it hits way too close to home, and greatly resembles my book shelf.
That was my desktop a couple weeks ago :) Still funny coming over from .NET
Is he trying to say with Rails, you won’t need XSLT or Design Patterns???
What I’d really like to know is which pages did he bookmark with sticky notes in JavaServer Pages, Hibernate, & Struts, and then why ?
A nice comparison, though, to be fair, shouldn’t “Patterns of Enterprise Application Architecture” go in the Ruby stack? Isn’t that the book of record for ActiveRecord?
Funny, but not fair.
Java Foundation Classes isn’t even relevant to web programming. With one Struts or JSP book (choose a framework) you should be fine. JBoss isn’t necessary for web app development. There are a couple architecture and pattern books that have no cooresponding equivalent in Rails (yet, but just wait, right?)
PoEAA was clearly misplaced.
Thad: You can ask him yourself: the guy who owns those books (and is now liquidating the Java stack) is at http://www.garbett.org/.
I was just excited to see my book. Andy Warhol was right.
Those are the only 2 books you need. Set the java ones on fire! :)
I think this is a perfectly fair picture… I have probably half the books on the java stack, and making headway on my project in J2EE was difficult at best.
With both Pragmatic books, I’m actually getting something done…
PoEAA clearly shouldn’t be on the J2EE stack. It highlights various architecture approaches there and certainly a useful book to understand Rails and other stacks behind the scenes better.
Maybe you should add dozens of unx related books onto the right shelf on how to get stuff like graphics generation working with ruby …
Ruby is great but it lacks a complete standard library (without going through the same sht like Perl’s-CPAN and PHP’s-PEAR)
Maybe Linux is too complex, look at all the Linux books out there. Maybe Apache is too complex. I’ve seen quite a few new books on MySql appear as of late.
Ok, enough with the sarcasm.
Basing the produced/purchased number of technical books on a technology as an indication of its complexity is foolish and naive. If you know anything about the technology book market, you’ll understand why there will soon be many more Ruby books from which to choose.
I think the image is funny, whether or not it’s realistic. Let’s all just take a deep breath and give a little smile for the sarcasm behind the photo. In case y’all didn’t read the news.com story, there are 7-9 Ruby on Rails books currently being written.
In any case, I’m a fan. :)