> I'd argue that how complicated a language is shouldn't be a factor for a company at that scale.
I'd agree with you re Dropbox, a relatively "enlightened" modern software company. But they are the exception, not the rule. Most companies, big and small hire the cheapest developers they can find. I'm not talking about silicon valley tech companies, but think e-commerce and corporate sites (Nordstrom, General Motors) and old school companies (e.g., Goldman Sachs, power utilities).
These companies don't care about the "right tool for the job", they care about the right people for the job. If the "people" are adept at antiquated technologies, then they'll still pass muster.
I'd agree with you re Dropbox, a relatively "enlightened" modern software company. But they are the exception, not the rule. Most companies, big and small hire the cheapest developers they can find. I'm not talking about silicon valley tech companies, but think e-commerce and corporate sites (Nordstrom, General Motors) and old school companies (e.g., Goldman Sachs, power utilities).
These companies don't care about the "right tool for the job", they care about the right people for the job. If the "people" are adept at antiquated technologies, then they'll still pass muster.