> Go is efficient, easy to learn, and freely available, but we believe that what made it successful was the approach it took toward writing programs, particular

> Go is efficient, easy to learn, and freely available, but we believe that what made it successful was the approach it took toward writing programs, particularly with multiple programmers working on a shared codebase. A discussion on the factors that make Go successful that doesn’t include the fact that it’s designed, dogfooded, and marketed by one of the largest software developers in the world is… incomplete to put it lightly. I mean just the name of the language proves this point. Golang was a decade old PL project when Google Go was released. But Google, enamored with the name, steamrolled over that project and claimed no one would be confused. Clearly, because overnight Go came to mean Google Go to 99% of developers, and Golang might as well have never existed. This shows Google Go from the very beginning has relied on the clout of Google for growth and adoption. We can talk about the merits of the language, sure, but to hear the authors of Go attribute its success to its focus on the practice of software development and leave out the 5000 lb software gorilla just adds insult to injury.