octave-maintainers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Octave review


From: Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso
Subject: Re: Octave review
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 12:53:57 -0600

2009/2/7 Daniel J Sebald <address@hidden>:
> Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
>>
>> 2009/2/7 John W. Eaton <address@hidden>:

>>> The syntax is identical to Matlab's syntax
>>>
>>> It's close, but there are some differences.
>>
>>
>> What are we missing as far as syntax goes? I thought it was only
>> specific functions that are missing, or features like object
>> orientation.
>>
>> I've reworded this to say that the syntax is near identical to Matlab's.
>
> More accurately, Octave's language is a superset of Matlab's.

That's what I was trying to say too and say so further down in that
same paragraph.

>>> Simulink, which I've never personally used but I understand is an
>>> important reason for the foothold Matlab has as a de-facto standard
>>> in the numeric community
>>>
>>> I think simulink is a fairly specialized tool and I don't get the
>>> sense that it is somehow responsible for Matlab's success.
>>
>>
>> It seems that in discussions of Matlab's success, Simulink frequently
>> comes up as a touted Matlab feature. I've rewritten this to make it
>> seem like a less important reason.
>
> True, it's a touted Matlab feature, but as I see it Simulink provides no
> extra functionality to the core of Matlab and adds little to what makes the
> language as useful as it is.  Octave/Matlab's benefit is that of any
> computer language: efficient processing and analysis.  Simulink adds little
> to that.

There seem to be many who disagree with you and use Matlab almost
exclusively for Simulink. We also get more or less regular requests in
the help mailing list if Octave has anything like Simulink.

I'm going to leave this part as it is now.

> One other thing about the review is that it tends to vilify Mathworks near
> the end.

That's intentional. It's a review, it's subjective, it's my voice, and
I don't like the Mathworks. I don't approve of their business
practices, I don't think that it's ok to be evil as long as you're
making a profit, and I do not believe apologists who say, "you see, if
they didn't do all the evil things they do, they wouldn't be making
money."

> Rather, Octave puts a resource at the disposal of users
> who can't afford otherwise, i.e., one doesn't have to buy their way into a
> scientific research community.

I think jwe has been pretty clear in several instances that he doesn't
see Octave as charity for those who can't pay for Matlab. He
emphasises the freedom of the software, that it can be distributed and
analysed without restriction except that it's forbidden to forbid. He
also expects to receive code for the code he's made, and he frequently
invites users to contribute to the code. Not charity. He wants
something back: code, contribution, involvement.

On a more personal note from myself, those who can't pay for Matlab
already aren't doing so, but use it anyways. Ask Jaroslav Hájek, ask
me, ask any user in the mailing list who isn't from the US or Western
Europe (and possibly a few other places), is software around them
copied with blithe disregard for copyright? Ask the Swedes and The
Pirate Bay:

     
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/4510366/Mathworks.Matlab.R2008b.UNIX.DVD.ISO-TBE

I frequently see dwellers of the US or Western Europe acting as if
copyright infringement were impossible, or invisible, or immoral, but
it is the norm everywhere except in the US or Western Europe. It is
not always overt like with TPB, but it exists everywhere in the world,
to various degrees. It is also very widespread in the same countries
where these beliefs about copyright come from, but it is of course
much less overt, and much more socially stigmatised.

Er... yeah, I hope that doesn't sound too contentious. Because I do
like to contend. :-)

- Jordi G. H.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]