5 ms·

Apple should acquire Wolfram Research

4 points by alexmolas 3y ago

az09mugen 3y ago
I'm not so sure about Apple making Wolfram's code open source, they are not really into open source as much as Microsoft or Facebook. Just for the record, anyone knows about VScode (ms) or React (fb), but who can give me an open source product from Apple and used by a lot of people ? Edit : typo
- surprisetalk 3y ago
  Two examples from Apple: • The Swift Programming Language: https://github.com/apple/swift https://github.com/apple/swift • FoundationDB - the open source, distributed, transactional key-value store: https://github.com/apple/foundationdb https://github.com/apple/foundationdb
  - az09mugen 3y ago
    Swift is open source and developped by Apple, but exclusively to be run Apple devices. Foundation DB as a matter of fact yes is an example of a company bought by Apple, which code has been open sourced and maintained after. You're right, but I think that's all we can get from Apple open-source contributions unfortunately. What I think is MS, FB, netflix, others contributed more heavily, by making something 'for the greater good'. Think of Typescript and LSP for Microsoft (they also created Entourage for Mac). Hhvm (and php related enhancement) and LLAMA for FB/Meta. The Chaos Monkeys and the return of experience of their microservices infra for Netflix. Go, Kubernetes, Android, for Google. Even Bootstrap from former Twitter. I'm not specially against Apple, they must have good reasons to follow this philosophy. From my humble point of view and I can be mislead, but it looks like Apple is not so much into the open-source game or sharing their experience. From this perspective, I suppose it's better they don't acquire Wolfram, but I can be wrong.
Someone 3y ago
FTA: Apple could afford to make everything open-source. FTA: Mathematica could become a “killer app” for Apple devices. I don’t see how to combine those two. Even if they could, killing the Windows and Linux desktop products could make a competitor stand up that would start competing on price and platform support, but eventually, also could compete on features.
petercooper 3y ago
I don't know Stephen personally but he has always been an interesting character to me and I love to follow his work and read his books. I don't think the article's idea is terrible, but I sense that Wolfram has a huge need for, and gains much satisfication from, autonomy. He seems to relish having a large company of scientists who he can call on (and why wouldn't you?) so if he sold to Apple, he'd either a) need to start another company with the money and hire lots of people all over again, or b) he'd end up working for Apple and lose his autonomy. If Wolfram Research is making money that serves his goals and personal preferences, I can't see why he'd sell to be honest. He doesn't seem like the type to ever retire and Wolfram Research seems like the perfect vehicle for his personal goals.

4 points by alexmolas 3y ago

I'm not so sure about Apple making Wolfram's code open source, they are not really into open source as much as Microsoft or Facebook. Just for the record, anyone knows about VScode (ms) or React (fb), but who can give me an open source product from Apple and used by a lot of people ? Edit : typo

surprisetalk 3y ago
Two examples from Apple: • The Swift Programming Language: https://github.com/apple/swift https://github.com/apple/swift • FoundationDB - the open source, distributed, transactional key-value store: https://github.com/apple/foundationdb https://github.com/apple/foundationdb
- az09mugen 3y ago
  Swift is open source and developped by Apple, but exclusively to be run Apple devices. Foundation DB as a matter of fact yes is an example of a company bought by Apple, which code has been open sourced and maintained after. You're right, but I think that's all we can get from Apple open-source contributions unfortunately. What I think is MS, FB, netflix, others contributed more heavily, by making something 'for the greater good'. Think of Typescript and LSP for Microsoft (they also created Entourage for Mac). Hhvm (and php related enhancement) and LLAMA for FB/Meta. The Chaos Monkeys and the return of experience of their microservices infra for Netflix. Go, Kubernetes, Android, for Google. Even Bootstrap from former Twitter. I'm not specially against Apple, they must have good reasons to follow this philosophy. From my humble point of view and I can be mislead, but it looks like Apple is not so much into the open-source game or sharing their experience. From this perspective, I suppose it's better they don't acquire Wolfram, but I can be wrong.

Someone 3y ago

FTA: Apple could afford to make everything open-source. FTA: Mathematica could become a “killer app” for Apple devices. I don’t see how to combine those two. Even if they could, killing the Windows and Linux desktop products could make a competitor stand up that would start competing on price and platform support, but eventually, also could compete on features.

petercooper 3y ago

I don't know Stephen personally but he has always been an interesting character to me and I love to follow his work and read his books. I don't think the article's idea is terrible, but I sense that Wolfram has a huge need for, and gains much satisfication from, autonomy. He seems to relish having a large company of scientists who he can call on (and why wouldn't you?) so if he sold to Apple, he'd either a) need to start another company with the money and hire lots of people all over again, or b) he'd end up working for Apple and lose his autonomy. If Wolfram Research is making money that serves his goals and personal preferences, I can't see why he'd sell to be honest. He doesn't seem like the type to ever retire and Wolfram Research seems like the perfect vehicle for his personal goals.