A good question
Why do companies that hire only "the best" employees, and want to provide "market-leading" products or services (again, their goal is to be the "best") choose to go with average technology in implementing these products and services? And then defend that technology choice by saying that they want a bigger pool of developers from which to hire -- more people that already know that technology.
If you want the best, you won't find it in the center of the herd.
Comments
[Isaac Gouy] June 29, 2006 0:07:04.382
hire only "the best" employees... go with average technology
Perhaps they value individuals more than tools.
Here's a screwdriver
[ James Robertson] June 29, 2006 8:31:34.925
Comment by James Robertson
We hear you're strong; use this to drive in nails...
No one gets fired for ....
[Arden] June 29, 2006 9:31:34.530
Few want to take the risk necessary. There is job security and mediocrity of results by choosing "safe" technology.
They want to say, "How can it be the wrong choice, everyone else is doing the same".
The problem is they are likely to get the same average results as everyone else.
There is an old broker's expression "No one ever got fired for buying IBM".
So the failed .NET project's manager may get the same safety shield.
Here's a screwdriver
[Isaac Gouy] June 29, 2006 11:01:37.191
My father's generation were amused by calling a hammer an American screwdriver.