> I've been programming for 30 years and have written code that is in every Linux distro
A very strange argument from authority considering Ken Thompson is one of Go's designers...
Considering the fact that 700 people attended the inaugural Go conference, and the variety of speakers (http://gophercon.com/schedule/), I think it's safe to say that Go has gained traction far beyond the Google employee and HN "bubbles".
The argument of authority of Go designers is actually my point. By designing the language in public (even before having source available) they now don't want to admit their errors, and neither do their supporters, because they are authorities, supposedly. I'm thinking of Pike in particular.
By keeping these discussions private, the Apple team did not need to protect their egos or their authority. We do not know who is responsible for which decisions at which points in the design, and they don't feel the need to defend their choices in public.
The Go team has admitted several errors publicly (e.g. var binding for range loops, some standard library design) on multiple occasions. Those errors won't be changed because we consider preserving backward compatibility more important. You could say that holding on to backward compatibility is "defensiveness and stubbornness", but it's really just making a different decision to what you may have done in the same situation.
In fact, your premise is almost entirely incorrect. Probably 95% of Go's language design happened before it was open sourced, so it's in exactly the same situation as Swift. The Go language hasn't changed a lot since November 2009.
A very strange argument from authority considering Ken Thompson is one of Go's designers...
Considering the fact that 700 people attended the inaugural Go conference, and the variety of speakers (http://gophercon.com/schedule/), I think it's safe to say that Go has gained traction far beyond the Google employee and HN "bubbles".