ursakhiin

We are talking first language. Not people who are looking for a job right now. What about that doesn't make sense? These are people who are likely months to years away from getting a job.

In my experience, the only places pushing for C#/.NET in Linux are places that were already C#/.NET before the core started to support it.

It's still fairly popular but that popularity is waning as languages with more modern design principles are gaining momentum without relying on a heavy framework like .NET. This could make it a poorer choice for somebody just learning as there may be fewer opportunities for junior devs by the time they graduate.

Even Microsoft has started transitioning to Rust in some cases. I'd hesitate to recommend a language to somebody getting started if that language is under publicized risk of being replaced by its maintainer.

I would add that a purely OOP language also probably isn't ideal for a first language, though. Being able to start teaching with just functions is quicker to introduce than having to describe objects first.

An OOP centric language is definitely appropriate for a second language. But if we are talking "intro", the faster somebody can type hello world while still having more programming concepts in the file than just the print statement, the better. For that last statement, I'd also exclude Python.

I always recommend talking about goals first then recommending a path.

If they know web dev is their future, JS.

If they know IOT is their future, C.

If they know games, probably still C as C++ is still likely the path for a while.

Do this, but leave Stinky Tofu out of it. The entire plan will backfire if there's a single item making the entire fair smell that pungent.

Plus, even in areas where Stinky Tofu is common, it's divisive. When I was in Taiwan, only about half of the people I talked to liked it. The other half wouldn't touch it.

I'm not saying they believe that Microsoft stole Halo. Their premise is that Halo would have been a success launching on Apple. That Bungie, with Halo, single handedly caused the success of the XBox. And that it alone could have caused Mac OS to become a gaming juggernaut. When in reality, Bungie desperately needed help and Microsoft recognized the value of launching Halo on the XBox. That symbiosis was needed for the success of both things.

The incompatibility is that the author clearly doesn't understand why the Halo succeeded. Microsoft has historically bolstered game and hardware developers in a way Apple has never been willing to. Their purchase of Bungie is only one example of that.

Apple would not have provided any of the support in the partnership that Bungie needed to complete the game. Their alternate universe is flawed because without the purchase of Bungie there is no Halo.

There's a lot of false information even in the premise of that introduction. Jobs didn't announce Halo as an Apple exclusive, he announced a simultaneous release with Windows. Microsoft didn't poach Bungie. Bungie was failing financially before the acquisition and Halo wasn't anywhere near complete at the time.

Microsoft saved Halo.

If the premise is that flawed, I'm skeptical of the rest of the piece.

Why wouldn't FizzBuzz refer explicitly to the challenge that shares its name?