The fact that you linked so many different companies is evidence that this wasn't just some push by a single company. Those things happened in parallel because the language was popular and is evidence of a vibrant community more than anything else. Being popular means many will want to make things with it yes, saying that it got popular since many people did things with it doesn't make sense.
Yes, because as I mentioned on the other comment you ignored, thanks UNIX, C, being born at AT&T, and the $0 cost of UNIX tooling up to the mid-80's alongside source code.
Had C++ been born somewhere else, e.g. Objective-C, and its popularity wouldn't exist.
> Yes, because as I mentioned on the other comment you ignored
I am not the other person you responded to.
Anyway, don't you think the fact that so many others decided to copy the language and implement their own versions of it is a testament to its popularity and not just that it got pushed by a single company?
It was, and still proves that a company marketing it with $500M didn't happen. Are you also going to say the same about python, or can we end this discussion?
Exactly! Thanks for proving the point. It was a collective effort of people/companies pushing a good programming language rather than a single company (Oracle) doing it. Not to mention that they license it in certain cases.
My point is that OP’s comparison is useless because Java most definitely has marketing costs mostly associated with that 8+ million Java developers, the same as other popular languages.
How is this relevant when the topic was that Oracle literally spent $500 million marketing Java? The community of anything popular is marketing itself, yes, but that is a very different thing from having an actual marketing budget to push it to popularity.
