"W.E. (Bill) Goodrich,
>
> > > >Wise up Mike. OOP is here to stay.

>
> LOL!!! Are you really THAT naive? That would help explain a lot.


Your links explained a lot about how you think as well. Of the 4 you
posted only 1 was from a (outdated) source most would consider reputable:

> http://iraf.noao.edu/iraf/web/ADASS/.../cogginsj.html


Even there it states:


There are three main weaknesses to the current formulation of object-oriented design and programming.

First, OOP tends to encourage bottom-up design...
Second, OOP tends to encourage toolkits of tiny classes...
Third, OOP provides no good answer to the problems of asynchronous I/O or concurrent processing, as occurs in user interfaces.

It looks like he is saying its not a good design because it can be misused, with maybe one shortfall
in concurrent processing. Those are hardly make or break technology busters. Developer discipline
is not the job of the language, and I/O and multi threading are being addressed, (FileStreams and
Threads).

Perhaps you should re-read this entire section because it refutes the idea you intended it to show:

3.3. Can Object-Oriented Programming Have a Long-term Strategic Impact on Software Development? Yes.

"OOP will not make developing your first project faster, nor your second. But with a good strategic core class library, later
applications within the same family will be developed quicker and more reliably."

LFS