> ... managed to grab the attention of the developer community with cool marketing
I am not sure I would call a very good talk at jsconf "marketing" nor would I think of Ryan Dahl as "the new DHH" especially when Ryan has been known to "wish for less node.js hype".
It seems you dislike the attention node.js has been given instead of node.js itself.
> Contrast this to reports of NodeJS crashes.
This belies an assumption that node is production ready, even though it is at a very low version number, and when Ryan has stated that he would not dare put it into production standlone (not behind nginx).
Basically, I think you could have better promoted ringo.
I don't dislike node.js (I don't agree with the direction). I just believe that RingoJS is a better solution for the majority of developers. (NodeJS may be better in niche applications like chat systems, a gaming server etc, even though I believe that technologies like GAE's forthcoming Channel API are even better)
You think an awful lot of your opinions. While confidence attracts, it came across to me as a bit blowhard-ish. ry and DHH didn't really talk big talk until they had walked a big walk. Perhaps you should focus on making a great product, let the "market" decide, and then focus on self-glorification?
EDIT: Oh yeah, I forgot to say... RingoJS looks great. Keep up the good work :)
My problem with NodeJS is that it practically stopped the progress on the CommonJS discussion group, by moving the attention from important issues like a standard library, module transport, etc to non-issues like async. What a pitty...
- The CommonJS module system: works as expected. Not having a proper module system was one of the few drawbacks of Helma (the predecessor of RingoJS).
- (Usually) laid-back, friendly & competent community (#ringojs!).
I wouldn't consider RingoJS "mature"; while it can be extremely useful in its current state (it certainly is for me) and the core functionality is stable, there's also a lot of (important) work left to do, especially when it comes to the "batteries".
In other words: For people who enjoy API and library design, RingoJS is an excellent project to contribute to right now ;-).
Well, NodeJS is a valid, if over hyped, solution. But it only helps you come up with a toy application. With 'toy' I mean an application that runs on your laptop or your staging server. For a production app you need deployment processes, multi version processes, system setup, server tuning, database scaling, backup processes, security policies, monitoring, profiling, admin console etc, etc. App Engine is the easiest way to go from toy to production (though Heroku-Node may provide a viable alternative).
Comparing comet performance between node and ringo should be interesting. Ringo uses jetty/cometd, so it should scale pretty decently as well. My guess is that node will use less memory per connection (and thus allow more simultanous connections), while ringo/jetty should have better latency. This is also what this benchmark suggests: http://praxx.is/post/486034949/comet-with-bayeux-node-js-vs-...
Before our node.js solution we actually ran Java along with a highly optimized JBoss Netty comet implementation and it had a hard time scaling since it used _a lot_ of memory. Generally, our Java solution used around 10 times more memory than our node.js solution. Like I note in that post:
Jetty Comet uses a lot more memory than a vanilla JBoss Netty implementation - at least based on my benchmarks.
> Don't judge the whole article by a single line...
If something is called A vs B I was would hope to see a list of how A is better than B. The only mention of NodeJS is pretty derogatory - it detracts from the promotion of RingoJS (which I found interesting)
I guess some times controversy can be helpful. The article did generate discussion on HN. And this discussion led to me taking a look at Ringo (which I hadn't heard of) to find out what the fuss what about. And now I'm considering trying out Ringo for a project I've been thinking about for a while. So, I guess, mission accomplished .