Nearly 300B market cap - actually way more than I would expect. This elitist attitude needs to stop. The user doesn't give a shit about your technology. If your preferred technology mattered at all, you be able to compete easily at 1/1000th the scale at a minimum. Yet you cannot even do that.
this is a often used arguments but it seems to answer the wrong question :
facebook didn't become popular because it had technical abilities or qualities that no other companies had. i mt became popular because of good product features and good marketing ( in the most general sense). So, to them, using a bad technology wasn't such a big deal.
it doesn't mean php is good, it just means that some businesses can afford a bad technological stack. Even online ones.
now, as software developpers, we should try to use the best technology whenever we can ( with best being relative to the business constraints of course).
But commercial success and technological achievments are two different things. sometimes they're linked (think whatsapp), sometimes not.
I agree and you are saying the same thing I did. I just pointed out that dogging on a company's technology choice, because you don't like it, despite the company having ~300B market cap, is silly, especially since the article talks about iOS, the # of engineers, and their company culture of moving fast & breaking things. That has nothing to do with PHP itself.
It is extremely rare that an internet company fails because of their technology choices. At the end of the day - the user does not care about your technology. They only care about the user experience and the value your product delivers.
