Heya Justin :-) Thanks for the walk down memory lane (I had totally forgotten about axeman!) and the kind words.
A bit of nuance on the "terrible experience of trying to run Ruby apps" bit. I'd argue that the setup process for Ruby/Rails in 2006 was not all that much worse than other web stacks at the time e.g. Java/WAR or Perl/cgi-bin. (Although PHP+Apache+mod_php deserves a nod for being notably smoother than most others.)
What inspired us to start Heroku was that once we switched from building apps in other languages and frameworks, development time was reduced by a factor of 2 or 3; but deployment time stayed the same. That is, before Rails we'd spent maybe three months developing the first version of the client's project, and then 4-6 weeks on deployment. (This was usually buying and installing a rackmount server into their office or colocation facility, but sometimes also waiting for a managed hosting service to do the same for us. For small projects we could use Slicehost but those were infrequent because our clients usually needed a powerful database server.)
Once we were developing with Rails, we found v1 could be done in a month or even less. It felt incongruent to spend a month on developing the app (the differentiated part of our work) and then longer than that getting it deployed (the undifferentiated part).
There's many other inspirations that were part of the story (end-user programming / citizen developer, which led to the web IDE you talked about) but this was the "deployment pain" part of it. It sticks in my mind because we frequently had to answer the question from prospective investors: "Is Rails really that hard to install?" And we'd say, no, the game has changed--development is so much faster and joyful now, that by comparison our existing ways of deploying feel slow, error-prone, and boring.
Hey, author of the article here. Thank you for making Heroku a thing. It is single-handedly one of the most significant catalysts for making my career happen. Without Heroku's free tier, I would have never been able to get started in tech.
Absolutely, I didn't mean to apply "terrible" comparatively to other languages at the time, just broadly in terms of "it was terrible compared to the eventual heroku setup" really. These days a lot of systems make it much easier than it was then, but it's not a specific Ruby problem that has been fixed. Hope you're doing well these days, it's been a long time but I still think fondly of the whole Bitscribe gang. In retrospect it was a really special place and time. Lars and his Saab, trying to explain to Morten why I liked Indian food so much (facepalm moment there), meeting Ricardo at 3am for 24h korean barbecue (and getting mixed up on which restaurant was which, since the signs were in hangul), hacking on the netflix prize, griping about Harpoon...
A bit of nuance on the "terrible experience of trying to run Ruby apps" bit. I'd argue that the setup process for Ruby/Rails in 2006 was not all that much worse than other web stacks at the time e.g. Java/WAR or Perl/cgi-bin. (Although PHP+Apache+mod_php deserves a nod for being notably smoother than most others.)
What inspired us to start Heroku was that once we switched from building apps in other languages and frameworks, development time was reduced by a factor of 2 or 3; but deployment time stayed the same. That is, before Rails we'd spent maybe three months developing the first version of the client's project, and then 4-6 weeks on deployment. (This was usually buying and installing a rackmount server into their office or colocation facility, but sometimes also waiting for a managed hosting service to do the same for us. For small projects we could use Slicehost but those were infrequent because our clients usually needed a powerful database server.)
Once we were developing with Rails, we found v1 could be done in a month or even less. It felt incongruent to spend a month on developing the app (the differentiated part of our work) and then longer than that getting it deployed (the undifferentiated part).
There's many other inspirations that were part of the story (end-user programming / citizen developer, which led to the web IDE you talked about) but this was the "deployment pain" part of it. It sticks in my mind because we frequently had to answer the question from prospective investors: "Is Rails really that hard to install?" And we'd say, no, the game has changed--development is so much faster and joyful now, that by comparison our existing ways of deploying feel slow, error-prone, and boring.