We're currently evaluating it for our own infrastructure. It looks very promising.
As I understand it, OTP is (among other things) a specific distributed framework.
> I don't think that's really true.
But, nothing you said contradicts it: it just argues for why BEAM is still a good platform for building distributed systems on even without OTP, not anything about OTP not being a specific distributed computing framework.
Maybe I'm in the minority but I read that as a direct contradiction.
I'm not sure what definition of a "distributed framework" you're working from, but if you're going to apply that label to something you ought to at least know what aspects of it specifically target the distributed use-case, and if it doesn't add anything to make the "distributed" part of that easier, then you can't very well claim its a distributed framework.
OTP is a platform for state management and fault tolerance. Everything "distributed" is already present in BEAM.
* riak_core: http://efcasado.github.io/riak-core_intro/ and http://marianoguerra.github.io/little-riak-core-book/
* lasp: http://lasp-lang.org/
* Weave Mesh: https://github.com/weaveworks/mesh
[ edit: Object Oriented though. My personal beef with the JVM is that its primary languages are object oriented, which is a programming model many people dislike, Clojure notwithstanding ]
(Perhaps you meant 'or'? Apologies if so.)