>>54
The point is, if you OOP at least do it correctly. Unfortunately what is correct OOP is up for debate. But there are some fundamentals. One is that there are different kinds of OOP. VB.Net and C# are class based OOP. Everything is an object with them, a fundamental. And there are a host of others. I am not saying they do it the best and they are the only ones. There could be a huge discussion about this and it ends with Smalltalk basically being the only true OOP language because it was created to be exactly that. The point is, at least as of right now, it is a correct class based OOP language.
>>55
So now swing is the de facto. What happens when a new de facto comes out? Impossible you say, well it did happen before. Will we have J2Button?
>>58
You are very correct. I wanted to be quick and succinct and mention a very basic problem. If they can't even name their GUI widgets correctly, you can easily see how there would be many other problems. Like I said, J2Button or maybe JEnterpriseExtremeButton (or similar) is inevitable.
You wanna know another problem with Java that I hinted at, the Java Framework is tied to the Java language. I know other languages have been tacked on with much effort (and no popularity) and Sun has been working hard for a long time now to get dynamic languages on it and apparently failing. At least .Net is not tied to a language, they just released 2 similar languages with 2 familiar syntaxes with it. The .Net CLR and C# were open standards before Sun did the same with Java.
You wanna create an ASP.Net site totally in Python, you certainly can (with visual studio support or without). You want to dynamically compile a block of Python code that dynamically compiles and calls a JavaScript method from C# while all use the base .Net libraries and/or libraries you created in VB.Net? You can do that too.
Can you nativley do that in Java? No.
You wanna create some performant generic/templated functions in Java? No. You certainly can create them, but they have less performance due to the fucking awful concept of type erasure. Let's just incur extra boxing and unboxing instructions all day long.
And those are some of the fundamental very base problems with it. We can delve deeper in a new topic.
But still I wouldn't say telling a noob to learn Java is terrible advice. But there are better alternatives.