6 ms·

I think a 'law' could be made out of that principle. Any proprietary language has to be significantly better than its rivals to gain traction, and if it does g

by halo 17y ago

I think a 'law' could be made out of that principle. Any proprietary language has to be significantly better than its rivals to gain traction, and if it does gain traction a free implementation or alternative will eventually appear.

jerf 17y ago
I think I'd have to add "general-purpose" into the mix. Complex proprietary niche languages seem to be able to survive a long time without competition. Especially true when the users of the proprietary language are not themselves computer programmers and nobody has the skill to just start creating competition. (Which is why mathematics does have some open options; there's enough skill crossover to make things like Octave possible.)
- dfranke 17y ago
  Octave is decent at what it does, but nothing in the open source world comes remotely close to Mathematica. Having easy access to it (and more importantly, being able to expect my peers to have the same) is one of the things I miss most about being a student. Wolfram's recent price cut for non-student personal use is alluring, though. Some time soon I might break down and pay for it.
  - jerf 17y ago
    I wasn't claiming it was a replacement, just that it, well, exists. Other proprietary areas don't have any open source competition where the target audience has even less overlap with "programmers".
  - apgwoz 17y ago
    I think octave is targeting matlab ddirectly, though mathmatica is obviously another competitor to both.
- praptak 17y ago
  I consider "being the only thing that serves the niche" a huge advantage. Same goes for "being bundled as the only scripting language for commercial product X" (like AutoLISP, especially before VB support in AutoCAD).
gwern 17y ago
Well, there's already Worse Is Better (what RPG called viralness is an integral part of WIB). Or we could call it "Mark's Law": > "In the long run, the utility of all non-Free software approaches zero. All non-Free software is a dead end." http://diveintomark.org/archives/2004/05/14/freedom-0 http://diveintomark.org/archives/2004/05/14/freedom-0

by halo 17y ago

jerf 17y ago

I think I'd have to add "general-purpose" into the mix. Complex proprietary niche languages seem to be able to survive a long time without competition. Especially true when the users of the proprietary language are not themselves computer programmers and nobody has the skill to just start creating competition. (Which is why mathematics does have some open options; there's enough skill crossover to make things like Octave possible.)

dfranke 17y ago
Octave is decent at what it does, but nothing in the open source world comes remotely close to Mathematica. Having easy access to it (and more importantly, being able to expect my peers to have the same) is one of the things I miss most about being a student. Wolfram's recent price cut for non-student personal use is alluring, though. Some time soon I might break down and pay for it.
- jerf 17y ago
  I wasn't claiming it was a replacement, just that it, well, exists. Other proprietary areas don't have any open source competition where the target audience has even less overlap with "programmers".
- apgwoz 17y ago
  I think octave is targeting matlab ddirectly, though mathmatica is obviously another competitor to both.
praptak 17y ago
I consider "being the only thing that serves the niche" a huge advantage. Same goes for "being bundled as the only scripting language for commercial product X" (like AutoLISP, especially before VB support in AutoCAD).

gwern 17y ago

Well, there's already Worse Is Better (what RPG called viralness is an integral part of WIB). Or we could call it "Mark's Law": > "In the long run, the utility of all non-Free software approaches zero. All non-Free software is a dead end." http://diveintomark.org/archives/2004/05/14/freedom-0 http://diveintomark.org/archives/2004/05/14/freedom-0