I don't think the problem is that schools would say the language is not good enough. They will simply say that none of their teachers knows the language or knows it well enough to teach it, and that they don't see a demand for courses about that language. Licensing issues come much further down the list, and more important is the question why they should teach a niche language in the first place. What would be their incentive?
I also think that there is a big difference between programming languages and 3D engines or any other kind of application software. For example, Graphics Design schools might be very open to new tools, but Computer Science schools definitely are not. Designers love new tools because they might make them more efficient and give them cool new features and a competitive edge. Programmers on the other hand learn Java because that is where the jobs are and corporations hate expensive changes.
Look how many problems even Microsoft has to push C# and .NET into universities - and they have entire business divisions that do nothing else but evangelize their products. They only have a rather modest success compared to the effort they throw at it, despite the fact that all of their .NET stuff is free as in beer, extremely well documented and even popular among commercial developers.
The whole problem schools face is that beginning students get frustrated and drop out of classes if they are using a language that doesn't yield results fast enough. They would love BlitzMax for this reason, if they knew it existed.
I think they would love Python even more for the very same reasons: It has an interpreter for an interactive learning experience, it does not add the complexity of data types, it is free, has a huge community, can (and has been) used in games, is available anywhere for any purpose and "comes with batteries included".
Still, universities use Java instead. Obviously, SUN did an extraordinary great job with evangelizing their platform.
This is an academic discussion anyway. Like I've mentioned before, it's BRL's business, and it's solely up to them how they run it. And everything indicates that they have completely different ideas about that as many of their customers.
I've had similar discussions about Xbase++ with my management back at Alaska Software at the turn of the century, and they decided not to listen either. Alaska Software GmbH eventually went bankrupt. The same people then founded a "new company" named Alaska Software AG, which also went bankrupt two years later. Now they have founded yet another Alaska Software incarnation, I think this time it is an american "inc.", and from everything that I see, they still have not learned from their mistakes: Still no marketing and no pushing the product into schools. It's hopeless. At least the company is now small enough that they probably manage to live off the established user base. And it seems that BRL is content with that, too.
I also think that there is a big difference between programming languages and 3D engines or any other kind of application software. For example, Graphics Design schools might be very open to new tools, but Computer Science schools definitely are not. Designers love new tools because they might make them more efficient and give them cool new features and a competitive edge. Programmers on the other hand learn Java because that is where the jobs are and corporations hate expensive changes.
Look how many problems even Microsoft has to push C# and .NET into universities - and they have entire business divisions that do nothing else but evangelize their products. They only have a rather modest success compared to the effort they throw at it, despite the fact that all of their .NET stuff is free as in beer, extremely well documented and even popular among commercial developers.
The whole problem schools face is that beginning students get frustrated and drop out of classes if they are using a language that doesn't yield results fast enough. They would love BlitzMax for this reason, if they knew it existed.
I think they would love Python even more for the very same reasons: It has an interpreter for an interactive learning experience, it does not add the complexity of data types, it is free, has a huge community, can (and has been) used in games, is available anywhere for any purpose and "comes with batteries included".
Still, universities use Java instead. Obviously, SUN did an extraordinary great job with evangelizing their platform.
This is an academic discussion anyway. Like I've mentioned before, it's BRL's business, and it's solely up to them how they run it. And everything indicates that they have completely different ideas about that as many of their customers.
I've had similar discussions about Xbase++ with my management back at Alaska Software at the turn of the century, and they decided not to listen either. Alaska Software GmbH eventually went bankrupt. The same people then founded a "new company" named Alaska Software AG, which also went bankrupt two years later. Now they have founded yet another Alaska Software incarnation, I think this time it is an american "inc.", and from everything that I see, they still have not learned from their mistakes: Still no marketing and no pushing the product into schools. It's hopeless. At least the company is now small enough that they probably manage to live off the established user base. And it seems that BRL is content with that, too.