Yeah there's plenty of criticisms for ObjC, but this post kinda makes no sense to me. No one wrote ObjC like that and to make a coherent argument as to why would require a historical non fiction book. I'm not sure who the target demographic for this post is, and it's Java section makes sense, but the ObjC section doesn't seem focused. It kinda turned into a "OO developers are stupid" post. I'm a game dev (primarily iPhone/ObjC!) - we started that shit and I can't get on board here.

I don't think the Java section makes sense either. I'm no historian, but I don't think it was ease of serialisation that led to huge amounts of config in Java. I suspect that was more to do with its status as an "enterprise" language.

Having encountered a similar proliferation of config in "enterprise" C++ (where it's usually not implemented in terms of serialisation) it was mostly driven by a need to modify the behaviour of systems in production without having to go through software release processes that were often cumbersome and beaurocratic.

Quite right, before Java, enterprise was full with CORBA, DCOM, VB/Delphi, Smalltalk.

Also many are unaware that Java EE was born as a Objective-C framework for OpenSTEP, Distributed Objects Everywhere, which was then ported to Java.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_Objects_Everywhere

Which was anyway mostly inspired by Objective-C way, not C++.

https://cs.gmu.edu/~sean/stuff/java-objc.html

My graduation project was to port an Objective-C framework developed on NeXTSTEP into Windows.

Additionally by going through NeXT manuals, or the Brad Cox book, I don't get where the author came to the idea everyone should be doing C.

Heck even the device drivers had a framework.