Brisbane, iiNet, Australia PING 202.146.213.3 (202.146.213.3) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 202.146.213.3: icmp_req=1 ttl=56 time=497 ms 64 bytes from 202.146.213.3: icmp_req=2 ttl=56 time=548 ms 64 bytes from 202.146.213.3: icmp_req=3 ttl=56 time=572 ms 64 bytes from 202.146.213.3: icmp_req=4 ttl=56 time=590 ms 64 bytes from 202.146.213.3: icmp_req=5 ttl=56 time=674 ms 64 bytes from 202.146.213.3: icmp_req=6 ttl=56 time=401 ms 64 bytes from 202.146.213.3: icmp_req=7 ttl=56 time=409 ms 64 bytes from 202.146.213.3: icmp_req=8 ttl=56 time=446 ms

--- 202.146.213.3 ping statistics --- 8 packets transmitted, 8 received, 0% packet loss, time 7001ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 401.078/517.690/674.353/89.851 ms

PING 106.187.98.41 (106.187.98.41) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 106.187.98.41: icmp_req=1 ttl=48 time=245 ms 64 bytes from 106.187.98.41: icmp_req=2 ttl=48 time=282 ms 64 bytes from 106.187.98.41: icmp_req=3 ttl=48 time=300 ms 64 bytes from 106.187.98.41: icmp_req=4 ttl=48 time=157 ms 64 bytes from 106.187.98.41: icmp_req=5 ttl=48 time=309 ms 64 bytes from 106.187.98.41: icmp_req=6 ttl=48 time=264 ms 64 bytes from 106.187.98.41: icmp_req=7 ttl=48 time=266 ms 64 bytes from 106.187.98.41: icmp_req=8 ttl=48 time=253 ms

--- 106.187.98.41 ping statistics --- 8 packets transmitted, 8 received, 0% packet loss, time 7001ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 157.676/259.900/309.386/43.775 ms

PING 50.116.56.20 (50.116.56.20) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 50.116.56.20: icmp_req=1 ttl=50 time=477 ms 64 bytes from 50.116.56.20: icmp_req=2 ttl=50 time=321 ms 64 bytes from 50.116.56.20: icmp_req=3 ttl=50 time=253 ms 64 bytes from 50.116.56.20: icmp_req=4 ttl=50 time=390 ms 64 bytes from 50.116.56.20: icmp_req=5 ttl=50 time=328 ms 64 bytes from 50.116.56.20: icmp_req=6 ttl=50 time=254 ms 64 bytes from 50.116.56.20: icmp_req=7 ttl=50 time=277 ms 64 bytes from 50.116.56.20: icmp_req=8 ttl=50 time=277 ms

--- 50.116.56.20 ping statistics --- 8 packets transmitted, 8 received, 0% packet loss, time 7006ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 253.785/322.739/477.706/72.651 ms

From my experience anyone who doesn't do proper research into viable options, is always the person who wants to build "cool" amazing bleeding edge things are junior developers.

There's nothing wrong with this mentality when developing fresh new code for small projects but once you work in an established company you need to stop and think. Is this a new language, technology? What kind of support is available, how hard will it be to hire someone that knows this or train them up? Do we already have something pre-existing that objectively is just as good?

Without such conservatism, you end up with undocumented frameworks that are no longer officially supported, no one knows it and there are hundreds of these things that just replicate each other, just because it was something "cool" at the time.

This applies to frameworks, languages, libraries so on. Someone has to support these things 2, 5, 10 years even down the track.

This happened to me. I got a job offer and left.

Every discussion he would bring up me being negative and it started to grind on me even in my exit interview.

I was sick of having that badge and no one else saying the truth, I ended up being quiet and the manager didn't like that either.

My new job is much better, I get the work done and everyone is happy. I'm upfront with my views.

Even just mentioning an issue was negative, when I said we need to earmark it and look at solving it.