Jon Pretty

It's what I try to do, but I also know it's extremely hard to get traction for a technically better solution when there's an incumbent. I have been particularly aware of this with trying to promote Magnolia "agnostically" when everyone else's frame of reference is Shapeless...

I think this has always been the case. It’s also important to remember that these things are never taken in isolation. For example, Shapeless is transitively on almost everyone’s class path, which is the true incumbency. It’s not so much about mindshare.

Continually presenting and re-presenting what is good and beneficial about your own thing is a great way to go about solving this. While it is tempting to include a compare-and-contrast (or worse, contrived strawmen) in such things, doing to is toxic and usually self defeating.

Additionally, remember that in many cases, it isn’t the end users you have to win over, but rather the framework ecosystem. That’s a hard war, but a much more focused one. And again, one that is actively sabotaged by loud negativity and toxic marketing.

I get the frustration. I really do in more ways than one. But if the best way to make one’s own work look good is to do everything possible to make someone else’s look bad, then maybe the real problem isn’t tech incumbency.

I agree with all of that. My point was intended more as a commentary that "the system" favors incumbency, and thus also rewards the challengers who attack the incumbent directly. But it sows ill-feeling, which means the approach is always a trade-off.

Wait, can you explain the "and thus also rewards" part? Rewards how?

Yeah: if there is an incumbent and a challenger, and the challenger can get attention by promoting comparisons against an incumbent, then that challenger has an advantage over another challenger who's vying for attention without making reference to the incumbent.