The entire thing is one big fat straw-man argument. The author (the bored one) didn't even mention FB in the article in question. The author (the attacking one) pulled that out of thin air based on little more than:
>From what I get of her article, if it’s not Apple or a startup, she’s not interested
Then he proceeds to refute the argument that he just set up by enlisting stats...not even convincing ones at that.
And finally whether something is boring or not is entirely subjective. This angle is as pointless as proving to stamp collectors that collecting stamps is boring.
I agree with his point in that the glamorous companies get attention at the cost of others & that this is a problem. The manner in which it was done however is a fine example of:
>a crap piece of journalism
I think that the underlying discussion is an interesting one. HN readers perhaps might get some benefit from understanding SAP technologies and how they integrate into the stuff they want to hack with. I've employed some real hackers into the SAP market and it is a deeply interesting and open technology stack.
That it is. Clearly SAP is doing something right.
Somewhat off topic, I'm surprised you say "open technology stack". I'm not particularly familiar with SAP tech, but I always thought they were as closed as it gets (& successfully so). Have I missed something?