ion berkeley, I'm glad I am not the only one here who might defend Ada. I have seen it work very well to produce military grade software under budget and with far fewer bugs than normal for the size of program involved. They performed to spec and that's what made the company money. If the spec was wrong, that's the DoD's problem (and, sadly, the soldier's problem.)
Ada works very well because you cannot write software with it without very clear "premeditation" for what you are doing. (Yes, I know, a real hairy chested programmer can write FORTRAN in any language. Trust me, it's harder in Ada than in most languages.)
It is also current. The latest release of the Ada specification is a preview of the scheduled 2012 version.
For commercial stuff Ada doesn't work very well because commercial software is seldom thoroughly defined and then developed without massive changes in direction. It is a very capable language. It is rather inflexible, resistant to changes and errors.