I like Node a lot. I think it solves some hard problems, but just like NoSQL, TDD, and a bevy of other things, they're not silver bullets even if they're painted like one.

That doesn't show that there was too much hype. That just shows there is enough popularity for an inexperienced developer to find it on their radar.

If it was overly hyped, you'd find a lot of experienced developers blogging about how they were horribly mislead and that node doesn't do what it advertises.

The FB engineer in his interview (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3527419) says it just about right that "Technology is a great servant but a terrible master"!

Don't throw node and redis in the same bucket please.

A considerable percentage of HN's visitors deal in exactly the realm that node.js serves: that gooey layer between browser and back-end systems. This is like complaining that coffee enthusiasts are interested in burr grinders when it's entirely unsuitable for chipping tree branches. There is no surprise that many HNers find node.js interesting and exciting.

Likewise, another 10-20% is people converting working code from a perfectly suitable technology to Node.js because it's the new cool thing.

It's not that either of these cases is "wrong." They know their problems better than I do. But I've been doing web development for about 10 years, I've seen this cycle a few times, and I know that every new tech has ridiculous adherents that do that stuff (e.g., Rails went through the same cycle except for "productivity reasons"). Everything looks like an old and busted nail when you have a new and shiny hammer I guess.

Let me put it this way: Why do we hear so much about Node when it's just another event-based single-threaded "asynchronous" execution environment running on a dynamic language, like half-a-dozen others that preceded it? Basically, it won the hype lottery. Whatever nice things you may have to say about it apply reasonably well to the half-dozen predecessors, too.

I think a lot of the criticism about people getting into it thinking that they can just port their client side experience to the server is valid. But the tone of so many seemingly anti-node posts turns a lot people off. I read more critical posts about node than I do positive ones because I know I will learn more. But sometimes it is not easy to cut through all the ego thumping and noob bashing. It would be nice to see the tone of the discussion shift, which I think it is starting to do, to what node is actually good at (in my opinion it seems to be acting as a glue for applications that require real-time).

Regardless, it works. I've started using Trello and I love it. Best organizational app I have used. Built in node. It works and I have not had a single problem with after two weeks of pretty heavy use.

So I don't think it just won the hype lottery, it has distinct advantages over Twisted and EventMachine, even if many of those advantages just have to do with relative accessibility and the ease of access provided by NPM.

It has hype because it has an involved and open community. Not just because it was lucky.

All languages, platforms, frameworks etc have strengths and weaknesses. There are lots of factors that contribute to a certain solution being "really good" for a problem as opposed to "serviceable but not great". Engineers look for great solutions to problems. They don't stick with ones that are sub-par just to avoid explaining to nay-sayers why they decided to switch.

Being able to standardize and coalesce the two sides of the web pipeline -- regardless of what magic happened at the other layers -- has obvious merits.

I'll save you some time: none.

I will concede that JavaScript supports programming in a functional style. However, if one uses that as the definition of a functional language, the term becomes nearly useless, basically excluding only Java.

    functional: adj, produces a correct result
      example usage: Despite its many warts, inadequacies,
        somehow JavaScript is actually functional.