I highly doubt that this has much to do with laziness and much more to do with a nasty positive feedback cycle of post-purchase rationalization (for most time is the most important thing they can invest) and commitment bias.
There are a huge number of languages out there and it takes a large investment to become highly proficient in any one of those. Once you make that choice and sink all that time into becoming great with it you start to fall prey to the trap of post-purchase rationalization by seeking out confirmation of your decisions. Once you have placated your doubts, you rationalize the increased investment to become even better (that's commitment bias, also known as irrational escalation). And then you start the cycle all over again.
The exact same phenomenon occurs in all investment scenarios be it phones (android v. iphone), video games (xbox v. playstation), or programming languages.
It doesn't have to be irrational. Haskell could easily be better than Common Lisp, but I doubt that the difference is sufficiently large to justify the cost of switching. So I don't.
Comments
I highly doubt that this has much to do with laziness and much more to do with a nasty positive feedback cycle of post-purchase rationalization (for most time is the most important thing they can invest) and commitment bias.
There are a huge number of languages out there and it takes a large investment to become highly proficient in any one of those. Once you make that choice and sink all that time into becoming great with it you start to fall prey to the trap of post-purchase rationalization by seeking out confirmation of your decisions. Once you have placated your doubts, you rationalize the increased investment to become even better (that's commitment bias, also known as irrational escalation). And then you start the cycle all over again.
The exact same phenomenon occurs in all investment scenarios be it phones (android v. iphone), video games (xbox v. playstation), or programming languages.
It doesn't have to be irrational. Haskell could easily be better than Common Lisp, but I doubt that the difference is sufficiently large to justify the cost of switching. So I don't.