Re: Octave review

[Daniel J Sebald]

Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:

> > 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 didn't say that.  I said Simulink adds little to efficiency and analysis.  It enshrouds 
Matlab with a layer of user interface that in some cases can be useful for a specific 
application.  I've not found Simulink too useful as far as my analytic pursuits.  (Note 
the reference I gave last time to Stephenson's "In the beginning... was the command 
line.")


> > 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."

All the evil things they do may be more perception than reality.


> > 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.

Hence the "bazaar-like" development that has been there since before transfer 
to Mercurial.


> 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.

I'm not disagreeing that that is the case; quite aware of it.  However, this 
point is a red herring as regards your original point.  Anyway, copyrights are 
a structured model of business.  These rules date back a long way and often 
were implemented to protect the intellectual property of small business owners. 
 As a consequence, they hold for bigger companies as well.  One could make a 
fairly good argument that structured business law has been more productive than 
other models.  (Not that I always look down on anarchy.)

Dan