Other build tools have a steeper learning curve. If they're more complex than the problem being solved, people won't want to adopt them.
When things get complex, there's the GNU make manual and libraries.
When you have to target multiple platforms, there's autotools, which is really complex and intimidating, but less complex than targeting multiple platforms.
Alternatives to make seem to fit in between make and autotools.
Make sucks. I've also heard that Unix sucks, and C sucks, too. Despite this alleged suckyness, these things not only persist, but accumulate improvements over the years.
Definitely agree, unfortunately people always know better, even when they don't have any clue. My philosophy is "If the development environment provide you a modern, native build system(ex: go build, get), go with it, otherwise stick to make unless using autotools etc. will give you a reasonable advantage."
Make is easy to learn.
It simplifies a slightly complex task.
Other build tools have a steeper learning curve. If they're more complex than the problem being solved, people won't want to adopt them.
When things get complex, there's the GNU make manual and libraries.
When you have to target multiple platforms, there's autotools, which is really complex and intimidating, but less complex than targeting multiple platforms.
Alternatives to make seem to fit in between make and autotools.
Make sucks. I've also heard that Unix sucks, and C sucks, too. Despite this alleged suckyness, these things not only persist, but accumulate improvements over the years.