Worse is a fuzzy term - let's define it. Worse in this case means things that can be used by many average people to do the things that they want without mental contortions and actually ship useful products to billions people.
Java does that. Linux does that. Windows does that. Lisp doesn't.
And note - your article wasn't written by the author - it was written by someone else.
Ok, this is what I was asking at the beginning, writing the question: "In what sense?"
You're entitled to your own definition of words, in this case you defined "worse" (and this definition is very popular, too!) and it's ok. My perspective is different and so my definition is - I don't care about "average people" at all, I like very much "mental contortions" and I enjoy making more than shipping, and so "worse" for me means something different altogether.
I just wanted to what you meant by "worse", really. I won't agree with you here, but I understand and accept your opinion.
I edited my previous post in reply to your note at the end.
You'll notice that most successful systems empower the common man (or unit) (capitalism/democracy/distributed systems/self-policing/bottom up ideas) and the most "ivory tower"/"top down" like systems don't perform nearly as well (totalitarianism/communism).
There are limits of course, and always complexity, but distributed incentive based systems appear to empirically work rather well.