See also:

Attributed to Steven Bellovin:

"Any software problem can be solved by adding another layer of indirection. Except, of course, the problem of too much indirection."

If you refer to Bellovin, he attributes the statement to David Wheeler, which agrees with the Wikipedia article:

Wheeler is often quoted as saying "Any problem in computer science can be solved with another layer of indirection. But that usually will create another problem."

bucy wrote:

So I go to the hardware store to buy the tools, and I ask the sales clerk where I can find a hammer.

"A hammer?" he asks. "Nobody really buys hammers anymore. They're kind of old fashioned."

I don't hate all frameworks. I just hate most of them. Some are created by teams of people that focus on doing repetitive work for you, or providing a minimal structure for similar systems, and thats it. Others have an agenda, and try to impose it on you. Common agendas include "XML is GREAT!" and "I like language X and you should never have to use ANYTHING else to make a Y application!" Good (and minimalist) frameworks can save months and weeks of time, but bad frameworks end up a net loss.

It is the job of the modern agile 'architect' to know the difference, and pick the right libraries for the project.