I completely agree with the heart of this article, and its reasoning for Go's popularity (e.g. familiarity for people who know languages like C and Java). It speaks to my experiences, anyway.
I went down the Go path myself for a while, because it was familiar, but I found that it had many of the same issues I was trying to get away from in other languages. As the article points out, I also found Go "boring."
After searching for a while, I ended up wanting to use Haskell, but it was taking me too long to become proficient with Haskell's unfamiliar syntax and functionality; which is why, the author posits, Haskell hasn't taken over the world. I ended up using Elixir instead. It offered me the functional paradigm I was looking for in Haskell, and the ease of managing large-scale applications, while also offering a familiar and easy to learn syntax. I'm still studying Haskell, and may eventually employ it professionally, but for now, Elixir is working for me just fine.
I went down the Go path myself for a while, because it was familiar, but I found that it had many of the same issues I was trying to get away from in other languages. As the article points out, I also found Go "boring."
After searching for a while, I ended up wanting to use Haskell, but it was taking me too long to become proficient with Haskell's unfamiliar syntax and functionality; which is why, the author posits, Haskell hasn't taken over the world. I ended up using Elixir instead. It offered me the functional paradigm I was looking for in Haskell, and the ease of managing large-scale applications, while also offering a familiar and easy to learn syntax. I'm still studying Haskell, and may eventually employ it professionally, but for now, Elixir is working for me just fine.