Python should try to displace Java

[Anand Pillai]

Sounds like being pragmatic to you means being paranoid also.

Anand

"Brandon J. Van Every" <vanevery at 3DProgrammer.com> wrote in message news:<bha9ee$vthc2$1 at ID-203719.news.uni-berlin.de>...
> Doug Tolton wrote:
> > On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 18:43:08 -0700, "Brandon J. Van Every"
> >>
> >> - in 5 years, nobody will be doing significant amounts of new
> >> application development in C++.  The writing is on the wall: garbage
> >> collection is essential.  Any C++ code will be support and legacy
> >> libraries.
> >
> > That's a ridiculous blanket statement.  People will be doing C++
> > development for a long time beyond that.  There are people still
> > writing Cobol for crying out loud.
> 
> Do you honestly believe that people are doing a significant amount of new
> application development in Cobol, as opposed to maintenance work?
> 
> >> - Microsoft is already implementing said strategy across all levels
> >> of the company today.  Microsoft developers don't do much C++
> >> development anymore. Various upcoming products are being written
> >> entirely in C#.
> >
> > <sigh> just what we need.  More buggy slow products from MS that have
> > Memory Leaks the size of the Mississippi.  C# is not a good
> > development platform yet.  Heck they are practically still in the
> > standard MS beta period.  Everyone knows not to use a MS product on
> > version 1.0
> 
> Ignore the trend at your peril.  A MS product is one thing.  A MS initiative
> across the entire company is quite another.  The last time they did that,
> Internet Explorer put Netscape in the doghouse.  Never, ever, ignore or
> diminish what Microsoft decides to do as an entire company.
> 
> >> - The "higher level language" playing field is crowded: C#, Java,
> >> Perl, and Python.  Mainstream industry does not need and will not
> >> make room for 4 higher level languages.  Any of these languages has
> >> to grow at some other language's expense.
> >
> > This statement is really vague, and has almost no factual basis.  If
> > there were only four programming languages the world would be a very
> > dull place.  You forgot to mention Delphi, Visual Basic, Power Builder
> > and a host of others.  There is room for a lot more than 4 programming
> > languages.
> 
> Actually, Visual Basic vs. C# would be a good discussion in another
> newsgroup.  Because the books about .NET Framework that I'm reading, show
> how VB is being modded and borgged to fit the Intermediate Language.  Which
> is essentially C#.  I wonder if it would be reasonable to say that in 5
> years, nobody will be doing new app development in VB, it'll all be C#?  But
> I'll take that up with the VB crowd.
> 
> >> - Python will never displace C# on Windows.  It's Microsoft's home
> >> turf and you can't fight directly with The Beast.  You will see UNIX
> >> boxes running Python, not Windows boxes.
> >
> > That's a bold statement, considering the abysmal adoption rate of C#.
> 
> Within Microsoft, the adoption of C# is universal.  That tends to have a
> powerful effect on ISV Windows development over time.
> 
> > C# isn't the dominant windows programming language currently, rather
> > its Visual Basic.  Java has far more applications written for Windows
> > than C# does.  MS really shot themselves in the foot when they went to
> > dotnet, essentially the adopted the Java platform 8 years after Java.
> > Now they are playing catchup with an inferior product.  I doubt
> > they'll ever catch up to Java overall.
> 
> The problem with your thinking here is there's very clear evidence that
> Microsoft can and does catch up to and surpass technologies that they have
> fumblingly cloned.  In fact, that's the basic Microsoft corporate
> philosophy.  Version 1.0 sucks, 2.0 is ok... 5.0 actually is a really good
> product and then the competition can't catch up anymore.  Example: DirectX.
> When it started it was complete garbage.  Nowadays it is technically
> superior to OpenGL in most areas.  Why they don't finally implement doubles
> and put OpenGL out of its misery, I'm not sure.
> 
> Why can MS catch up?  Because Open Source people assume their technological
> superiority and rest on their laurels.  They think they don't have to market
> because they are technically superior.  Also, their ranks are populated with
> strong engineers who don't *like* marketing, as a matter of basic
> personality.  They never get it in their heads that they have to
> counter-market to some degree in order to hold the line.  If you don't do
> any marketing, Microsoft completely out-markets you and then you die,
> technical merit or not.
> 
> >> - Sun is about to die.  It has done nothing for anyone lately and
> >> has no further tricks up its sleeve.
> >
> > People have been saying this for years.  I'll believe it when I see it.
> 
> Read a paper.
> 
> >> - Sun has failed to make Java live up to its claims of universality.
> >> Java is for all intents and purposes simply a widespread programming
> >> language, not a portable computing environment.  Portable computing
> >> environments are, in general, a pipe dream as long as Microsoft is
> >> around.  It will always be Windows vs. open standards.
> >
> > They must give you a good edjumacation at the Redmond campus.  Java is
> > by far the best portable computing environment available.
> 
> Care to name a concrete example?  A testimonial?
> 
> >> - Ergo, Java is the weakling of the litter for Python to attack.
> >
> > No factual basis for this statement.  Java and Python are really
> > entirely different things.  Python is meant as a scripting language,
> > Java is a Systems programming language.  It is meant as an alternative
> > to C++, Python isn't.
> 
> You're saying Python isn't useful as a systems language?  Then it is already
> dead.
> 
> > Who does Python have to defend itself against?  Python is Open Source.
> > The only way it's going to die is if everyone stops developing it and
> > it stagnates.
> 
> You got it!  And development stops when a langauge loses all meaningful
> mindshare.  What is the battle of mindshare?  A marketing battle.  It is not
> a technological battle, except in the grossest terms of complete
> incompetence.  Time and again, the marketplace has proven that kludgy but
> well marketed products carry the day.  They only fail when they absolutely
> can't do the job.
> 
> > If that hapens it will be because something *significantly* better came
> along.
> 
> No, it is not an engineering meritocracy.  Look at a company like DEC.
> Wonderful technology company.  Couldn't market its way out of a paper bag.
> That's a warning for this c.l.p crowd.  Don't sit around congratulating
> yourselves on how superior your techology is.  Recognize the strategic
> competition and market against it.
> 
> > Python doesn't have to defend
> > itself, your Microsoft background is showing through here.  C# is by
> > far the weakest language of the four.  It is buggy, slow and immature.
> > It has the smallest user base, the least amount of industry backing
> 
> and is 100% backed by all the resources of Microsoft.  It will not go away,
> and its shortcomings will be fixed at a blistering pace.
> 
> > and a community that is rising up against it's benefactor.
> 
> Huh?  Care to explain?
> 
> > I think
> > you dramatically overstate it's chances.  Historically Microsoft
> > switches technologies every 3 or 4 years.  That only gives C# about 2
> > years to go before it's dead in the water like every other MS
> > "Innovation".
> 
> What part of "100% committment across the company" don't you understand?
> You really are blind.  You don't live in Redmond, you can't conceive of
> having access to this level of information.  And who in c.l.p woudl tell you
> these things?
> 
> Well, you've been warned.
> 
> > Historically
> > those with the best technology and the best economic system prevail
> > against inefficient and inferior models.
> 
> You have *got* to be kidding me.  Intel??!?  Windows??!?