Blue Flavor

Folklorico! by Kenny Meyers

The Folly of Idle Comparisons

August 8th, 2008 at 2:28 p.m.

There is a constant discussion here at the Blue-labs about idle comparisons: “Photoshop vs. Fireworks”, “Apple vs. Windows”, “Smurfs vs. Snorks”, “Rails vs. Django”, etc. and whether they are valid. I feel these types of comparisons are interesting, sure, but they do little for our community.

The argument for these comparisons

Here are several arguments for these discussions:

  1. The act of comparing creates a debate about tools that may inspire the tools’ creators and users to change their ways.
  2. The beginner argument is another one. Beginners who are looking to purchase a tool for their own use could derive some value from knowing what experts think about it.
  3. There is also the entertainment argument, which I believe is valid. Sometimes, we developers and designers get bored. Sometimes it is a great time waster to read what people think of your tool versus someone else’s tool. It allows us to clarify our thoughts on what we use and how we use it, and it solidifies our partnership with our tools. This is sometimes placed under “facilitate discussion”.

The problem with these comparisons

Here are the problems with those arguments:

  1. The change argument: There are admirable motives, but the problem is that these arguments happen on the internet, a land where people get defensive easily and conversations soon degenerate into the ever-flowing cesspool of mindless drivel and vile prose. A creator and user are likely to be more solidified in their own feelings when the argument is carried to this point, and change is unlikely. I rarely meet people who change their mainstay tool (such as Photoshop or Fireworks). I doubt Jon Gruber of Daring Fireball would advocate for Windows anytime soon.

  2. The beginner argument: When there are two strong advocates for one side or the other, it is rare that a beginner will obtain value. The most likely scenario is they hear about a feature and investigate with a more objective source.

  3. I can’t really argue with entertainment value. It’s really funny how malicious and stupid these comparisons’ comments can get.

These arguments (or perhaps, bloguments?) revolve around ego. As a fellow card-carrying, ego-swinging member, I’m willing to step in and debate pointlessly as well. I feel a rush to jump on a minor mistake in someone’s comments or dismiss an argument based on subjectivity, as if I were some sort of objective guru about tools.

There never seems to be a clear winner. Has Rails beaten Django, or vice-versa? It’s clear that Photoshop has more user then Fireworks—does that mean we should crown Photoshop king? If east and west coast hip-hop can solve their differences and start producing shoddy music, can’t we all just get along?

It’s like fecal entertainment. Like watching Britney Spears’ private life on TV. It’s geek mind-masturbation and the end result is a lot of people left with sour tastes in their mouth.

So no — we probably can’t all just get along, but we can at least stop debating our tools. I don’t care if things don’t validate, nor do I care whether Photoshop can do Smart Objects™ and Fireworks vector images. My concern is: Does your tool accomplish the job for you? If so, great.

It gets us nowhere as a community to endlessly debate these topics.

Kenny Meyers

More Information