If you're just going to make ad hom accusations, there's no way of pleasing you. I addressed templates, which to the extent I've seen them, are a confusing nig

If you're just going to make ad hom accusations, there's no way of pleasing you. I addressed templates, which to the extent I've seen them, are a confusing nightmare. You can say that's because I'm not smart enough, but I'd retort that I don't want to debug something that smart. Non-nullable references you can make a case for, but but it's minor and you can also say 2 types of references complicates things much more than one type of reference. Java dodges all kinds of confusion by only having one kind. And context management, which is such a relic that I had to google it, seems to be a hack to make memory management easier to deal with. Again, clever, but I'm not sure I want to debug it. How about avoiding static state and dodging the whole problem. Java has 50 keywords total, including "void" and all primitive types, and it can do almost all of what C++ can. Yes, the OO model is a product of 1995. See smalltalk. EJB is "enterprisey", Java is not. And all organizations, regardless of hipness, need maintainable code. Anyways, certainly nothing is perfect, so I'd love to hear more thought-out reasons why Java sucks.