Saying java's "more relevant than [we] think" is sort of a straw man. It's relevant, it's just many developers don't like java: its syntax, its limitations, th

Saying java's "more relevant than [we] think" is sort of a straw man. It's relevant, it's just many developers don't like java: its syntax, its limitations, the java "culture" that surrounds it, the fact that many of us must know and use it to be relevant in the marketplace. As for the argument that it's worth it because it's just not that complicated so you can explain it to a ten year old in an elevator... is that really what we're supposed to aim for? Do we really want to give java a 3rd grade gold star because it's in that sweet spot between assembly (hurts brain) and scala (hurts brain). I don't know. I sort of like to go for the epiphany that comes with finally getting scala (like really getting it) or Lisp macros or monads or etc. You're right that the "cool kid" mentality that attaches itself to the new shiny language is annoying, but I'll take it over the very average mentality that attaches itself to java in that article.