Things that framework other than RoR Cannot do?

Including druapl,wordpress(Cms) and other frameworks like django what are those things in web development that they cannot do but Ruby on Rails can do??

Please clear me this confusion!!

Thanking you.

Mostly, ruby makes experienced programmers happier

You should try out other things to see what I mean



New video up now at real fastcgi rails deploy process! Check it out now!

Its really more so of a personal pick. I mean Ruby makes thing much
easier as compared to other languages, but again that should not be
the only reason for choosing to work with RoR or other frameworks
built on top of other languages.

For you to filter down to a particular framework or language, you
should atleast give others a try and see what fits you and your coding
styles and your project requirements.

Someone asked me the other day why I preferred Rails to any of the PHP
frameworks (which I occasionally have to work with :-/

"Because Ruby is so pretty!" :slight_smile:

It’s also important to understand the distinction that Rails and Django are general purpose frameworks for web development whereas WordPress and Drupal and the like are content management applications, albeit with many hooks for developing plugins and extensions to the base app. So if we take those two groupings, the answer to your question is “a lot” - general purpose frameworks are for application development, whereas a CMS is really for solving a specific subset of web development problems.


Not generally a fan of such threads, but I program in a bunch of languages using a variety of web frameworks. Apart from the completeness of the ecosystem and the fact that a lot of things “just work” better, for me the biggest win with Rails is pain free testing. If I need to write some high level acceptance tests of a flow that includes a third party web service and needs some model data, I can’t think of any other framework that could give me the equivalent productivity of cucumber, capybara, fakeweb, vcr and factory_girl.

The main downside is that figuring out you need cucumber, capybara, fakeweb, vcr and factory_girl and getting them all playing nice takes a while, so I’d argue that to become a decent Rails programmer has a fairly steep learning curve just because there are so many moving parts - from rvm to the various gems that need to be understood to write good Rails apps. And the speed of development means that you’re either working with 0.1 gems that are buggy and need forked, or you’re already out of date before you get into production. As such, I’d argue that Rails is best for more capable programmers, more complex projects (if you can hack a single page form in PHP and that’s all you need, it’ll be easier) and people who are willing to invest the time to keep up with the latest trends in Rails development.

Just my 2c

Best Wishes,


But those are CMS arent they? is not the same, rails is sooo much flexible. You have much more control over its components

Mostly, ruby makes experienced programmers happier

Yay! I was going to say this. Oh, and don’t forget the ponies and rainbows :slight_smile:

Oh wait. I am happier, but didn’t get the ponies or rainbows. Any idea which github account so I can fork? :slight_smile:

Mostly, ruby makes experienced programmers happier

Yay! I was going to say this. Oh, and don’t forget the ponies and rainbows :slight_smile:

Oh wait. I am happier, but didn’t get the ponies or rainbows. Any idea which github account so I can fork? :slight_smile:


You have to fight a few unicorns first, but they do come eventually :slight_smile:

Some geeks have given very good arguments and I would not want to spoil their responses. I have noticed the likes of Peter Bell, Manoj Sachwani and Chris Kottom (to mention but a few) have given unbiased arguments about the two.
I would like us to add some spices. Notice carefully how I use the words website and web applications/systems. ( For further details check this

Web Application frameworks (WAF) are skeletons (frames) of the that is designed to support the development
of web applications and web services. On the other hand, Content Management Systems (CMS) are templates designed to allow (often non-programming) users to create and manage website content with relative ease.

WAFs are programming-oriented and are primarily designed for software/web-application developers. As such, they provide a flexible way of adding code to applications. CMSs are content-management-oriented and are created primarily for users with little knowledge of web programming languages like web designers. These provide a flexible way of adding content to the websites.
you want to develop a website with limited access to a database and very few interactions among classes, WAFs are not a good option for that. Think of a CMS in such cases. On the other hand, if you want to build web applications add some * coherent structure to your code; and make use of plugins, addons and libraries that shorten the development time* * thereby avoid re-inventing the wheel*, then CMSs are not an option for that. Look for a WAF.
Another aspect to note is that CMSs are web developer’s view of a website and WAF is a web-application developer’s view of the same.
fail in cases where one is building a customised web application/system
such as a electronic data system. They provide the developer a minimalist control over the application/system in such cases, which makes developers feel naturally constrained. On other hand, (though they
don’t fail but) WAFs are not good candidates for websites designed to just display some information such as news bulletins. Since most WAFs do
not have a (non-programmer’s) content management section, they sound so
scaring to non-programmers. Of course, most software developers like adding a user-friendly CMS-like interfaces to their websites, but such interfaces are often times incapacitated(i.e have very limited options) and are not very common in web applications/systems.
You may wish
to note some CMSs have grown into WAFs (and/or the reverse), so the dividing line between the two is very slim. Some CMSs even raise questions as to whether their core functionality is to help with content
management or Examples include Drupal and SilverStripe for PHP.

I'm not an expert, and Rails mailing lists is one of the most helpful
I must say.

I use WordPress and Drupal too. Wanted to change because Rails has the
only unpainful way for Test Driven Development. I could not find any
other framework which has such a nice way to do that (except Java with
JUnit and JS but I mean complete webframework.) Or is it exist for


I Completely Agree with Edmond on this. There is definitely personal
perceptions working on CMS,WAPDF, etc.

Wow what a good read