C#

No, it's not great. In fact, it's not even very good. There are many things that cannot be done easily. It is bound to one vendor who can change the standard on a whim and sue any alternative vendors. It is clearly intended for ENTERPRISE program and makes inefficient use of it's keywords. Much of it's power comes from doing things that are considered harmful. It's standard library has almost nothing in common with other libraries.

Still, it is mostly simple to write and very simple to read. It is a lot of what Seeples should have been. It knows it's place and stays there. It does not puke and bleed out on the simplest of errors. Where did Bjarn go wrong? Was it the megalomania and feature creep? Was it too much focus on compatibility with C?

>>12
Half of it is obvious if you ever end up using software written in the two languages. The other half comes from caring about programming languages and paying attention to things like F# and Scala. They have good ideas, M# will have good ideas in it too (confirmed because MS applied for patents on them.)

The real problem with C# is nobody has any idea how litigious MS is going to be about it down the road. Somehow uncertainty is worse than the worst case scenario because Oracle went all the way with the lawyering over Java, yet people still think Java is the legally safe bet. Bayes vs. the devil you know, I guess.