The last slides make some good points about going up Maslow's hierarchy. Some companies pick new technology because they have the engineering power to build on top of the new stuff. But not everyone has this, and they're probably better off picking a boring database.
Personally, I'm considering migrating from a stable MongoDB way of doing things to postgres, but this is more because I understand postgres much better recently. It could be that Mongo does the same things I want to do. Keeping on MongoDB is the boring option for me even if it's not the classic example.
However, there's a little misconception that boring means safe. MySQL is popular for "just working" until emojis started breaking it. You'll have new stuff, like RFC 9078 where you can respond to emails with just an emoji. Everything breaks eventually in this world, it's more about what's less of a pain to patch together once it breaks.
Another advantage of choosing boring/mature technology is that you have a broader base of talent to hire.
And that often means you can select across domain expertise, not just technical expertise.
If you are building a real estate SaaS for office managers and you build it in vanilla javascript and node. You have a base of 10k engineers available right now, one of which might have managed an office, or tried to be a remax rep. If you build it in svelte and the latest rust framework, you will probably hire 2 engineers specializing in that narrow stack
The last slides make some good points about going up Maslow's hierarchy. Some companies pick new technology because they have the engineering power to build on top of the new stuff. But not everyone has this, and they're probably better off picking a boring database.
Personally, I'm considering migrating from a stable MongoDB way of doing things to postgres, but this is more because I understand postgres much better recently. It could be that Mongo does the same things I want to do. Keeping on MongoDB is the boring option for me even if it's not the classic example.
However, there's a little misconception that boring means safe. MySQL is popular for "just working" until emojis started breaking it. You'll have new stuff, like RFC 9078 where you can respond to emails with just an emoji. Everything breaks eventually in this world, it's more about what's less of a pain to patch together once it breaks.
LLMs have a much larger training dataset of boring technology, thats also an advantage.
agreed. dealing with a complex polygot projeft. mumtiple mongodb, node hell, etc. hard to onboard.. or move fast
Another advantage of choosing boring/mature technology is that you have a broader base of talent to hire.
And that often means you can select across domain expertise, not just technical expertise.
If you are building a real estate SaaS for office managers and you build it in vanilla javascript and node. You have a base of 10k engineers available right now, one of which might have managed an office, or tried to be a remax rep. If you build it in svelte and the latest rust framework, you will probably hire 2 engineers specializing in that narrow stack