[dijit]

Fog of the future not withstanding; most people aren't going to have been using IDEA since 1.0.

If you learned Java between 2001-2012 then the default was Eclipse or netbeans.

So you should not be comparing IDEA from 2001 to today (or any individual IDE), you should be comparing the IDE landscape or ecosystem of 2001 to today, and part of that analysis should be a requirement to weight IDE's based on popularity and the recommendations of established institutions (academia, companies).

[maccard]

So you've changed IDE once in 22 years? That doesn't change the argument in any meaningful way.

[dijit]

I know my school has changed IDE recommendation 7 times in 22 years.

But my point is much, much broader than one persons experience.

[clows]

> I know my school has changed IDE recommendation 7 times in 22 years.

Just so I understand you correctly - am I using your comment

> That's cool, I didn't know you were most programmers.

correctly here?

[dijit]

Clearly theres something I have failed to communicate, you have an experience that does not match the most programmers and I pointed that out.

As I stated in my post above, (after someone asked me a direct question) that: despite answering the question, it was the wrong question and not the point I was making.

[xbar]

I was using Visual J++ in 1998.

We did a bakeoff of Eclipse, NetBeans and IDEA upon its beta in 2001. IDEA won hands down and is still the IDE of choice among the developers who work on our codebase.

[clows]

My first java IDE was Visual Cafe by Symantec 1999 - and if I remember correctly I started using IDEA around 2002 (and still do - incl. Rider, etc).

[dijit]

That's cool, I didn't know you were most programmers.

[clows]

I only wanted to mention that certain IDEs still used today are not coming and going but have been around for decades and are still more or less the same (keybinding, etc).

Maybe I just don't understand your comment - even translated it still confuses me tbh. (I'm not a native speaker). Sorry if you feel offended I guess.

[dijit]

Not offended, but not understanding because of translation is fair.

My entire point was that it's unusual for someone, especially someone who is new to IDE's or programming in general, to pick something brand new. As educational institutions will take time to change from the popular thing and most companies will also need time to adjust.

Distilled: my point is that you should not compare IDE release dates to the stability of IDEs vs Editors. -- you must consider the entire ecosystem of each at the time.

Another perhaps good example to conclude this would be something like python backends. One could (unreasonably) argue that Python has been around since 1991; but backends typically were written in Perl or PHP for a very long time. It wasn't until 2008 or so that Python started making headroom for web backends (ruby around the same time) -- The possibility existed but the popularity wasn't there.

A similar argument could be made for Sublime text (which is uncommon these days) but was extremely common in 2010. Or Atom, which doesn't even exist any longer but took considerable market share from Sublime in its heyday.

It's not fair to say "x has been around for y time therefore it is not changing", the ecosystem does change and it has darlings and detractors.

The only exception to this ecosystem over tool argument I can think of is probably visual studio itself as that was a monoculture and stuck around because of that.

[afterburner]

What do you consider the successor to Atom and Sublime today?

[dijit]

I would definitely say VSCode, I wonder if anything comes after it though. :)

I know there are many editors fighting for its market share, like Zed from the original Atom team or Fleet from Jetbrains.