It doesn't sound like you've read any of the articles. There are details and tradeoffs and limitations found by the people talking about them. And there is a ma

It doesn't sound like you've read any of the articles. There are details and tradeoffs and limitations found by the people talking about them. And there is a massive knowledge vacuum because if there is a good solution, it's not something that is obvious and well discussed by Apple. Ignoring and dismissing them doesn't make them actually go away. Here's two on just the Responder chain: http://inessential.com/2016/05/17/responder_chain_followup http://inessential.com/2016/05/17/responder_chain_followup http://shapeof.com/archives/2016/5/dynamic_swift.html http://shapeof.com/archives/2016/5/dynamic_swift.html The bigger point (which is in that first Brent Simmons link) is that people have built all sorts of frameworks and tools over the past 20 years depending using of the dynamic features of Obj-C. Some are Apple's like all the above plus others like Interface Builder and XCTest, but other people have built their own things too that rely on the same concepts. How do these people move forward in a Swift world? None of these people are arguing that Swift is terrible and going back to Obj-C. They are trying to use Swift. They are only interested in solving the problems they have (and well). When Swift fails to solve a problem or is far worse than its predecessor, there is a problem. Not everybody can nonchalantly throw their stuff overboard like you are willing to do with Core Data.