Why Did Java Fail To Innovate?

It seems Java and every other programming language is copying C# now as they innovate new features and programming paradigms. Why did Java fail to keep up innovating?

Attached: java-vs-c-sharp.jpg (1025x766, 58.82K)

Google -> what is project Loom java

Oracle only makes money in lawsuits

Design by committee is a bad thing, user.

is this why C++ just works?

What features has C# come out with that are so innovative

Convergence, responsiveness, first order functions, interfaces

Design by committee works just fine. All my favorite languages have been through the ANSI committee process. Java wasn't designed by a standards committee but a committee @ a private company

You will never be a real programming langueage

Name one feature that originated from C# and ended up in Java later on
Features that appeared in ML in the 70s and landed in C# before it did Java don't count

samefag

Delegates/Lambda. Took Java 7 years to implement it. Async await, linq,

>Delegates/Lambda
Not C# inventions
>async/await
Java will never have async/await. Project Loom is a completely different and better concept
>linq
Gargabe. Also this should be a library instead of being an actual part of the language.

>Why Did Java Fail To Innovate
Their design goal of running on every platform meant they could only move at the speed of the slowest member. Microsoft created J++ with both a positive and negative goal. They wanted to embrace, extend, and extinguish the language to make the windows platform the best platform. Sun Microsystems decertified Microsoft from producing a java compiler in reaction. Then C# was born.
Had Sun left Microsoft alone there would continue to be vanilla Java, but there would be a much more rich version of super java that would now run on all platforms like .NET does. Yes, the power tools would still be windows centric like .NET's are today.
Sun would still be out of business either way. But maybe Microsoft would have bought Sun instead of Oracle and then Oracle would be gone and the world would be a decidedly better place.

Java does C# better than it can, but when you're done writing your program, C++ does it better than that.
>Regular old C does its job the best, once you know what it is you're doing

Java's value proposition was the perfect programming language for big business / "enterprise": easy to learn, cheap to maintain, and reliable. Innovations are not conducive to any of those goals. Being slow to move is a good thing here, as untested features which could upset stability are left unimplemented until they have been proven to be worth the trouble, such that they aren't trouble at all. It's one more thing the business's codemonkeys would have to know, and it all adds up, both in time to learn and capacity to maintain. There's also the thing that Oracle controls Java, and that's not the best steward to have for anything.

C# on the other hand is languishing in popularity because it throws stability and reliability onto the backburner, with little regard even for backwards compatibility. Whatever it may gain in pushing boundaries, it loses in so doing tarnishing its image with risk-averse potential clientele.

This is the real world. New doesn't mean better.

daily paid m$ tech shilling

Add properties, Linq, anonymous objects and delegates.

Why would innovating be a good thing? When making something, I don't want to change it every year because some retard felt like adding more unnecessary bloat.
All langs should be like C and SQL.

>linq
it is a library silly billy.

segfault core dumped

It didn't need to, due to its widespread adoption and market share.

>Java does C# better
Their performance is nearly identical. Any benchmark that shows a big edge either way is biased. C# has more aspects of web and enterprise development as first class citizens of the language than java.