[Catalyst] Why Catalyst instead of Ruby on Rails?

[Perrin Harkins]

On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 16:34 -0800, Philip Edelbrock wrote:
> Oh, a couple other little observations: There are some medium to largish 
> sites out there in Rails (the project I'm on could conceivably be the 
> largest to date when it launches?), but watch out for the argument that 
> (large site) Basecamp is written in Rails and therefore other large 
> sites can also be done in Rails.  Basecamp wasn't written in Rails, 
> Rails was written from what came out of Basecamp.

I know you're not the one who said it, but Basecamp is nowhere near
being a large site in terms of traffic.  A competent programmer should
be able to build something that scales to that size without even
thinking about it.  A large site would be something on the order of
citysearch.com or amazon.com.  

To put this in perspective, take a look at some of the traffic rankings
on alexa.com.  Slashdot.org comes in at 847 in terms of popularity.
Basecamphq.com comes in at 14,964.

- Perrin