RoR, Judge Judy, and little old ladies

[Dave]

Robby wrote:
>> - Are there any well defined studies suggesting that RoR developed 
>> apps. are cheaper than, say, apps. developed with PHP, using a 
>> traditional development approach?
> More enterprise speak?

Guilty as charged <g> Unfortunately, no matter how promising and cool a technology is many managers 
have to have a solid justification to try something like RoR even for a smallish project. Heck - I 
don't blame the managers - I'd have to have some solid justification to divert some of my personal 
time over to learning RoR, because there's so much to keep up with, and much of it ends up being 
nothing but a temporary phenom (you mentioned Struts for example).

>> - Is RoR here to stay?
> I'd say the adoption and the momentum is going to keep it in swing for 
> quite a while, how long? no clue.. I mean, back in the day Struts was 
> the thing (bleh), and it's slowly becoming defunct. Can you be 
> productive in RoR, sure, can you improve it? Sure, it's all about 
> tastes.. but if you want something in the terms of an independent report 
> on how great it is, I can't help. I've used it, it's worked for me on a 
> quite large intranet application, but nothing is the be all end all.
> 
>>
>> Then I've got to ask: How could D possibly improve on RoR enough to 
>> get people to move away from RoR to DeRailed?
>>
> It shouldn't be able moving people from, to d's implementation, it's 
> about providing a strong stack of development tools to allow people who 
> want to code in d on the client, on the server and indirectly, for the web.

You're right - but is DeRailed really what many of the talented [tango] lib. developers should be 
working on (if they were so inclined to take direction)?