"If you ever find yourself writing a blog post on why PHP sucks, you are not ready."
About 4 articles down the article is about why PHP doesn't suck. This amuses me for some reason.
About 4 articles down the article is about why PHP doesn't suck. This amuses me for some reason.
If I thought slagging PHP in a blog would get us more hires, I'd do it without hesitation.
I can do that, if you really couldn't do it yourself. It's not uncommon at all.
Like I said, I don't do it because I don't think it would help. But in some cases, it can definitely help. How many startups use their dedication to a specific (incrementally more modern) tech stack as a perk while hiring? Quite a few, and these often have subtly disparaging remarks baked in. And I've absolutely had success hiring and growing my team by explaining why we use Clojure over stock java whenever possible.
and imo explanation of why you use one technology over another is not equal to just a "PHP sucks!" blog post.
A CTO isn't a technology evangelist for or against that technology. The role is to get the most out of whatever technology the company is using. If talking down weaknesses in one technology and talking up strengths in another helps find hires looking for the technology the company is using or shows the strength of the company in being able to address those weaknesses or take advantage of those strengths, then that's good for the company.
CCP Games is probably certain someone else can do without Stackless Python. The folks at Facebook don't care if you use PHP or Hack at some other company. Booking.com is perfectly happy for you to use Python, Java, Forth, Haskell, or whatever at your company but they sponsor Perl conferences. Those companies will continue selling their in-house stack and its advantages. They'll continue pointing out where one solution grew creaky and they improved it with something else (like Facebook and Hack). They do that because it's good for them.