The goal isn't to replace, it's to understand so you can grow past it.
If you start from the fact that people haven't adopted it, maybe it's not as beautiful or enjoyable to most developers.
If you start from the fact that people haven't adopted it, maybe it's not as beautiful or enjoyable to most developers.
The reasons it isn't more well adopted are many. The conclusion that therefor it's "not beautiful or enjoyable to most developers" is flawed and baseless. It assumes perfect meritocracy where the most beautiful and enjoyable languages for developers are the most popular ones.
I don't think it would require a "perfect meritocracy" for languages that are found "beautiful" and "enjoyable" to succeed if they are also "practical" and have accessable tooling.
What makes languages popular is clearly multidimensional, where astehctics are certainty one dimension (even ugly languages get updates over time if there's enough energy behind the project) but so is timing, tooling, investment, community, etc.
I think it's reasonable to conclude that whatever beautiful nature is/was there wasn't enough. In terms of weight of importance, or degree of agreement.