3 ms·

I don't think it's obvious that open source displaces commercial for scientific computing. For every example like R which has in many places displaced S-Plus,

by earl 15y ago

I don't think it's obvious that open source displaces commercial for scientific computing. For every example like R which has in many places displaced S-Plus, there are counterexamples like matlab, for which the open source clone Octave is a bad joke, at least the last time I tried using it: missing functions, slowness, extreme difficulty installing; or Mathematica, or eviews, or gauss, or Maple. One other potential factor: a lot of this software is driven by academic use, either because academics used it or that's where people were first exposed, and academics often receive large discounts.

ehsanu1 15y ago
When did you last try Octave? Professor Andrew Ng recommended using Octave (probably because it's free) for the online Stanford machine learning class (http://ml-class.org/ http://ml-class.org/).
- botj 15y ago
  Probably not for a while. At this point octave has a TON of Matlab compatibility: The grammar is pretty spot-on although there is usually some release latency when Mathworks changes it (obviously since their plans are not made know. Ahead of time). Octave even has Matlab source level compatibility for mex files although they are slower than octaves own c interface. If you start drifting away from Matlab core needs into the specialized add ins Mathworks provides (simulink, financial packages, etc) then Octave can't help. If you need those then I find that Matlab is rarely the tool for the job either (you just don't know it yet ;))
steve_cronin 15y ago
Cant even compare R, a statistical engine to Matrix Laboratory, a numerical matrix manipulation engine. they are different software packages designed for different purposes. eg. plugging R into a high grade NMR magnet and processing signals is probably not a good idea. R is sick though and I am alwalys pleasently surprised at what clever people are doing with it. Octave on the other hand shouldn't be used until someone writes a proper interface and decent graphing. MATLAB is a million light years ahead of Octave in that regard
muuh-gnu 15y ago
> extreme difficulty installing Today's Octave installs do not need more than click-click-ok-done or apt-get install octave. > for which the open source clone Octave is a bad joke I think you're not giving Octave enough credit, considering that they have only a few part-time developers, and that nobody does sponsor them, they have accomplished a respectable amount of functionality over the last 20 years, it is extermely unfair calling them a "bad joke". Of course with those limited resources they are not able to match the output of Mathworks, but what they can do as of yet is usually more than universities teach, and _still_ many departments are kind of married to Matlab, only mention Matlab to students, give only matlab examples, matlab labs, matlab exercises, etc. Also very respectable people like Gilbert Strang, who gave the MIT basic Linear Algebra and Computational Science and Engineering classes, seem to have enough vested interests in Mathworks to not even mention Octave to students briefly as something they can download and work at home. Octave is extremely powerful and capable for what you pay for it, and deserves at least a mention. It is probably not different at other universities and other departments. Several professors I had to deal with were similar, either not even aware that open source packages like Octave, Scilab, Maxima, Scipy exist at all, or extremely faithfully married to companies behind proprietary packages like Matlab/Maple/Mathematica.
- Create 15y ago
  This is not a new issue. Institutionalised education is most of the time producing "knowledge workers", as MS put it a while back. But without the knowledge, of course. http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/transcriptions/EWD12xx/EWD1283.html http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/transcriptions/EWD12xx/EWD1283...
Thrymr 15y ago
What's replacing Matlab is not octave, but Python/Numpy.
- dlib 15y ago
  I still wish there are going to be some syntax improvements to Python then. Matlab's way of working with matrices is simply excellent. Formulas on paper map almost one to one to the code. Apart from that I'd take Python over Matlab any day but am forced to work with it for some of my classes.

by earl 15y ago

ehsanu1 15y ago

When did you last try Octave? Professor Andrew Ng recommended using Octave (probably because it's free) for the online Stanford machine learning class (http://ml-class.org/ http://ml-class.org/).

botj 15y ago
Probably not for a while. At this point octave has a TON of Matlab compatibility: The grammar is pretty spot-on although there is usually some release latency when Mathworks changes it (obviously since their plans are not made know. Ahead of time). Octave even has Matlab source level compatibility for mex files although they are slower than octaves own c interface. If you start drifting away from Matlab core needs into the specialized add ins Mathworks provides (simulink, financial packages, etc) then Octave can't help. If you need those then I find that Matlab is rarely the tool for the job either (you just don't know it yet ;))

steve_cronin 15y ago

Cant even compare R, a statistical engine to Matrix Laboratory, a numerical matrix manipulation engine. they are different software packages designed for different purposes. eg. plugging R into a high grade NMR magnet and processing signals is probably not a good idea. R is sick though and I am alwalys pleasently surprised at what clever people are doing with it. Octave on the other hand shouldn't be used until someone writes a proper interface and decent graphing. MATLAB is a million light years ahead of Octave in that regard

muuh-gnu 15y ago

> extreme difficulty installing Today's Octave installs do not need more than click-click-ok-done or apt-get install octave. > for which the open source clone Octave is a bad joke I think you're not giving Octave enough credit, considering that they have only a few part-time developers, and that nobody does sponsor them, they have accomplished a respectable amount of functionality over the last 20 years, it is extermely unfair calling them a "bad joke". Of course with those limited resources they are not able to match the output of Mathworks, but what they can do as of yet is usually more than universities teach, and _still_ many departments are kind of married to Matlab, only mention Matlab to students, give only matlab examples, matlab labs, matlab exercises, etc. Also very respectable people like Gilbert Strang, who gave the MIT basic Linear Algebra and Computational Science and Engineering classes, seem to have enough vested interests in Mathworks to not even mention Octave to students briefly as something they can download and work at home. Octave is extremely powerful and capable for what you pay for it, and deserves at least a mention. It is probably not different at other universities and other departments. Several professors I had to deal with were similar, either not even aware that open source packages like Octave, Scilab, Maxima, Scipy exist at all, or extremely faithfully married to companies behind proprietary packages like Matlab/Maple/Mathematica.

Create 15y ago
This is not a new issue. Institutionalised education is most of the time producing "knowledge workers", as MS put it a while back. But without the knowledge, of course. http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/transcriptions/EWD12xx/EWD1283.html http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/transcriptions/EWD12xx/EWD1283...

Thrymr 15y ago

What's replacing Matlab is not octave, but Python/Numpy.

dlib 15y ago
I still wish there are going to be some syntax improvements to Python then. Matlab's way of working with matrices is simply excellent. Formulas on paper map almost one to one to the code. Apart from that I'd take Python over Matlab any day but am forced to work with it for some of my classes.