Published: November 2025
Author: Chris Beaver
Category: Development, Architecture
Every developer loves playing with new frameworks and technologies. But for production applications—especially ones you’ll maintain for years—boring, proven technology usually wins.
Here’s what I’ve learned about making technology choices that age well.
The Bleeding Edge Problem
New technology is exciting. The documentation makes everything sound easy. The blog posts show impressive demos. The community is enthusiastic.
Then you actually try to use it in production and discover:
- Documentation is incomplete or wrong
- Critical features are missing
- Breaking changes happen frequently
- Community is small when you hit edge cases
- Third-party integrations don’t exist yet
- No one knows how to debug the weird issues
I’m not saying never use new technology. I’m saying understand the cost.
What Makes Technology “Boring”?
Boring technology has several characteristics:
It’s Been Around
Not necessarily decades, but long enough that major bugs are fixed and patterns are established.
It’s Widely Used
Large user base means problems you encounter have been solved before. Stack Overflow has answers. Forums have discussions.
It’s Stable
API doesn’t change every release. Upgrade paths are clear. Deprecations are handled gracefully.
It’s Well-Documented
Official docs are comprehensive. Third-party tutorials exist. You can find answers to common questions easily.
It Has an Ecosystem
Libraries, tools, integrations, hosting options, monitoring solutions all exist and work well together.
My Boring Stack
For most projects at cbCodeStudio, we use:
Backend: Laravel
Laravel has been around since 2011. It’s mature, well-documented, and has a massive ecosystem. When I need to integrate with a payment processor, send emails, queue jobs, or handle authentication, Laravel has well-tested solutions.
Could I use the latest hot framework? Sure. But then I’m spending time solving problems Laravel already solved, and I’m doing it with less community support.
Frontend: React or Vue
Both are mature, widely adopted, and have large ecosystems. They’re not going anywhere soon. When I need a date picker or table component, multiple high-quality options exist.
Database: PostgreSQL or MySQL
These databases have been battle-tested for decades. They’re not sexy, but they’re reliable. They handle the data needs of most applications without exotic database features.
Server: Ubuntu Linux
Rock solid. Excellent documentation. Huge community. Runs everywhere.
Deployment: Docker
Containers have won. Docker is the standard. The ecosystem is mature.
When to Use Exciting Technology
Boring doesn’t mean always avoid new technology. There are good times to experiment:
Side Projects
Personal projects are perfect for learning new tools. The cost of failure is low.
Non-Critical Features
Using a new charting library for an internal dashboard? Lower risk than using an experimental database for core business logic.
Specific Problem Solutions
Sometimes new technology solves a specific problem much better than alternatives. If it’s clearly superior and the risk is manageable, use it.
Products vs. Services
Our own products are better places to experiment than client projects. We own the long-term maintenance burden.
Team Expertise
If your team has deep expertise in a newer technology, that changes the calculus. Boring is partly about familiarity.
The Hidden Costs of New Technology
When evaluating technology, consider:
Learning Curve
Time spent learning is time not spent building features. Not just initial learning—ongoing learning as the technology evolves rapidly.
Hiring
Finding developers who know your exotic stack is harder and more expensive than finding developers who know React or Laravel.
Maintenance Burden
Who fixes things when they break? With popular technology, community solutions exist. With new technology, you’re often on your own.
Upgrade Treadmill
New frameworks often break things between versions. Staying current becomes a project in itself.
Integration Gaps
Need to integrate with Stripe? SendGrid? AWS? Established technologies have ready-made integrations. New ones don’t.
Real-World Example: The JavaScript Framework Churn
JavaScript frameworks are notorious for churn. Angular, React, Vue, Svelte, Solid, Next, Nuxt, Remix… the list grows constantly.
Each claims to solve problems with previous frameworks. Many are genuinely good. But the churn creates real costs:
- Have to relearn patterns every few years
- Existing codebases become “legacy” quickly
- Hiring is complicated by fragmentation
- Tutorials and Stack Overflow answers go stale
React and Vue have won by being “boring enough.” They’re stable, widely adopted, and have mature ecosystems. They’re not perfect, but they’re good enough for most use cases.
Making the Decision
When evaluating technology choices, I ask:
Will this technology exist in 5 years?
Not “might it exist,” but “will it definitely exist with active maintenance and community?”
Can I find developers who know it?
If I need to hire help or hand off a project, can I find qualified people?
Are there production case studies?
Not demos. Real production applications at meaningful scale.
What happens when things break?
Can I Google the error message and find solutions? Is support available?
What’s my exit strategy?
If this technology doesn’t work out, how hard is migration?
The Boring Technology Portfolio
Think of technology choices like an investment portfolio. Most should be stable, boring, proven. A small portion can be experimental.
For a typical project:
– 80-90% boring, established technology
– 10-20% newer technology where it provides clear value
– 0% bleeding edge in critical paths
This ratio changes based on risk tolerance. A mission-critical financial application? Maybe 95% boring. An internal tool? Can experiment more.
Signs You’re Using Technology Wrong
Red flags that you’ve chosen unwisely:
Spending more time on infrastructure than features
If you’re constantly fighting your framework instead of building, something’s wrong.
Can’t find answers to common problems
Small community means you’re on your own for troubleshooting.
Breaking changes every update
If upgrades are painful, the technology isn’t mature enough.
Explaining your stack takes 20 minutes
If you can’t quickly explain your architecture to a new developer, it’s probably too complex.
The “Resume-Driven Development” Trap
Developers sometimes choose technology because it looks good on their resume, not because it’s right for the project.
I get it. Learning new tech is important for career growth. But client projects aren’t your personal learning laboratory.
Better approach:
– Use boring tech for client work
– Learn new tech on side projects
– Introduce new tech deliberately when there’s clear benefit
Exceptions That Prove the Rule
Sometimes boring technology genuinely isn’t the right choice:
Performance Requirements
If your application needs Go’s performance characteristics and PHP genuinely won’t work, use Go.
Domain-Specific Needs
Real-time collaboration might justify WebSockets or WebRTC despite complexity.
Regulatory Requirements
Specific compliance needs might dictate particular technologies.
Existing Ecosystem
If you’re building an iOS app, you’re using Swift or Objective-C regardless of what’s “boring.”
The key: choose technology because it’s the best solution to your problem, not because it’s interesting.
Boring Doesn’t Mean Stagnant
Using boring technology doesn’t mean never learning anything new.
Stay current with:
– Best practices in your stack
– New features in tools you use
– Adjacent technologies that complement your stack
– Industry trends that might eventually become boring
The difference: you’re learning about mature technology that will serve you long-term, not chasing hype cycles.
Selling Boring to Clients
Some clients worry that boring technology means outdated or inferior. Here’s how I frame it:
Mature means reliable
We’re using battle-tested technology that won’t surprise us with unexpected failures.
Popular means supportable
If you need to hire developers later or switch vendors, finding people who know this technology is easy.
Proven means faster development
We’re not solving problems that have already been solved. We’re building your features.
Stable means lower maintenance cost
Less time fighting framework changes means more time improving your product.
Most clients care about these outcomes more than using the latest framework.
Wrapping Up
Choose boring technology not because you lack curiosity, but because you understand the total cost of ownership.
Save your innovation budget for solving your customers’ actual problems, not for fighting infrastructure.
The goal isn’t to never use new technology. The goal is to use it deliberately, understanding the tradeoffs, and accepting the costs.
Most of the time, boring wins.
We help clients make smart technology decisions based on their needs, not trends. Need guidance on architecture or stack selection? Let’s talk.