Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote: > Bane wrote: > > Nick Sabalausky Wrote: > > > >> "Steve Teale" <steve.te...@britseyeview.com> wrote in message > >> news:hjf9uk$1tr...@digitalmars.com... > >>> I see that Go has now usurped D's former place at #13 in Tiobe - which I > >>> realize of course does not mean anything. But I'd be interested to hear > >>> what the D aficionados think of Go. > >>> > >>> It probably would not suit Andrei. > >>> > >> It's a gimped, obfuscated and immature imitation of D. > >> It's little more than a concurrency-model experiment masquerading as a > >> real > >> language. > >> > >> Also: > >> - As far as I'm concerned, its real name is "Issue 9" (search "google go > >> issue 9"). > >> - It's the Buick/Cadillac/Oldsmobile of computer languages: Garbage that > >> gets attention solely because of the name(s) attached. > >> - Does nothing to change my opinion that Google has done nothing > >> noteworthy > >> outside of search engines and maybe their ad service. > >> > >> > > > > It looks like to me they are making Google Goo for prestige. Search engine, > > browser, now programming language... Whats next? OS? Laptops? Fast food > > franchise? > > I don't understand all the criticism behind Google's product. Of > corporate software producers, Apple and Google are the two ones making > products that work reliably and are carefully designed.
They get lots and lots of undeserved attention. Even when the final products are not that great, and occasionally when the people praising them would be hostile towards the same kinds of products from smaller companies. Reception often border on being an outright hysteria. It's mostly the fault of the people who react this way, but both companies put a lot of effort in creating this effect via various kind of marketing too.
