Your reply just reiterates my point because you're doing the same thing the post author does. In between the talk of version control, his post is laced with allusions that people working with technologies he doesn't (PHP & mySQL in this case) are a bunch of dumb baddies.

Why would someone possibly care enough to go out of there way to write a blog post condemning them. I just don't get it. This seems like a popular tactic in the Ruby and Python communities although it's toned down enough over the last few years that I thought this movement was about over. This post just helped remind me it isn't.

For the record, I use MySQL every day and still do some PHP work. So maybe you don't know as much as you think you do about me.

It's no use debating with someone that absolutely refuses to admit the possibility that their tools are sub-par.

If your feelings get hurt: good. Maybe if it happens enough times you'll move on to better tools and technologies, you'll have an easier time building better products, and your customers will be more happy.

I'm shocked at the disdain people on HN have for certain tools. I was always taught that it's not the tool, it's how you use it. I think Panic is a perfect example of that axiom. Their website (at least the older versions) has been emulated by web developers many times over. They were one of the first sites I know that enabled drag and drop icons to download files; they nailed scrolling content with tab browsing, and everyone quickly copied it. I assume they use their own tools, so while it may not sound like a cutting edge tool, they are certainly able to produce cutting edge results.

PHP is like the old rusting hand saw to Python/Ruby/etc's laser-guided table saw.

Sure, we're all cutting wood. But some of us are doing it with faster and safer tools. Maybe the consumer doesn't notice the difference, but the carpenter sure as hell does.

Building on the LAMP stack is still worthwhile when you don't have the time or money to devote to sysadmin tasks.

I use Rails, Django, raw PHP, whatever makes the most sense for the job at hand.

As long as the remote files are not in production and are under version control, what's wrong with editing them directly?

Sometimes it is hard to effectively duplicate the server environment (OS, RDBMS, ODBMS, web server, reverse proxy, other web server, caching tier) on a local machine. Particularly in a test deployment (as opposed to dev) you want to be very close to the production setup.

At least with one or two clients of mine, I have tried for months to try and change their workflow to allow local development but they resist. Because they give me limited access to the production files, I can't export the database to bring it to my localhost. Thus, I have no choice but to edit the files on the server. Most of the sites I work with aren't live production sites, but it's still a slow and outdated workflow.

You're right about that first sentence but wrong on the rest. Editing files on the servers is pure idiocy even if you're using the system Panic does with an exact clone of the production server for dev changes and script that syncs them. Even in that scenario you can still easily end up with a FUBAR situation.

However, as wrong as that is, your comment tells me you're living in some kind of bubble. There are no right and wrong workflows or tools. Yes, there are objectively better and worse ones but not right or wrong ones. The fact is that the vast majority of developers actually do develop the way that Coda2 encourages. I don't agree with it and I know there's a better way just like you but Panic is just giving the people what they want. I just interviewed at a dev shop that actually had this exact setup: A development server. That's it. You'd edit on the dev server and hope to god you didn't screw it up. Yeah, real live, profitable, established companies do this. So do millions of developers.

No one is being an apologist. You're simply being an elitist. The world of professional web developers doesn't consist of what we all read on HN and see in the Valley. Real world development workflows would probably make someone like you puke but its reality.

People aren't convincing themselves that their tools are best. They simply have a preference for them and that's that. They don't care about all the bullshit minutiae that every HNer loves to navel-gaze about. They don't care if PHP is inconsistent and insecure - they build working apps with it that people love. I don't even know why MySQL is now a target of the hipster crowd. Is it because its too popular now? Seems like it.

But I digress. The point is that there really are as many ways to do things as there are developers and Panic shouldn't apologize for not pandering to the hipster set. Honestly, I was disappointed with Coda2 too. I used the original some years ago when I was learning and loved it. I moved on to better tools eventually but I will never say that your tool is wrong and mine is right. You build with what lets you build and I'll do the same. Some developers get by using tools some of us look down on because they simply haven't run across situations where they've hit their limits and the tools have become more of a hassle than a help. Not everyone takes the same path in their journey. Not everyone wants to be the best. Some people are cool with mediocre. Some are hobbyists. Whatever. Let them have their tools. Like I said, there's no right or wrong. Just good, better, and best (and even those come with their fine print).

For the record, I (as the author of the original article) agree with all of this. My point wasn't to say that Coda is bad, but rather to explain why it's never felt like the right tool for me.