Honestly who even needs octave unless you are trying to run someone else’s Matlab? Numpy and ipython notebooks are superior to both in literally every way.
Matlab’s moat is that their shit mostly* just works, and most people uaing matlab arent the same ones writing the check. Basically no dependency hell, no random broken libraries, no 30 different 3rd party options that for the same thing. If matlab has it, it almost always works, as expected, and they’ll sell it to you and give you support if you have a problem. Stay inside Mathworks domain, you’ll have a pretty good time. Basically I’m saying matlab follows the zen of python better than Guido does
As someone who has swapped from matlab to python, mathworks puts in real work from all the money they pull in. Shits expensive, but you get like… 50% of what you pay for. Even better if someone else pays. We did it for the money savings, but it definitely cost us extra dev time doing dependency management and version upgrade testing, and all kinds of little things.
*I got some issues with how they changed how figures are rendered, and that generally was causing issues during the changeover.
The moat is also external libraries, documentation, teacher materials and youtubers from India making incredibly specific videos on your exact niche subject.
In Octaves case many of these start to be covered, I did some courses back in Uni fully with Octave, but I couldn’t do all.
I havent used Matlab (or Octave) for 20 years. I assumed by now that Python would have caught up and overtaken with all of the scientific/mathematic/computing libraries.
Not by a long stretch. There is one single toolbox that I use which requires MATLAB to run. The toolbox itself is under GPL, and it’s fantastic work, but the authors don’t have the time and resources to port it to pythonz and it’s the only reason why I (begrudgingly) use MATLAB at all.
I’m in the exact same position.
Locked in software also stifles innovation of the soft itself.
But as usual, FOSS must be done by sweat and tears without pay, so it usually takes a while.
That’s the thing. I think FOSS’ main competitive disadvantage is the lack of money. Because money gets things moving/written, fast.
Looking at the R community, it seems like this isn’t necessarily true. You can find so many resources to very niche problems. The main difference seems to be that there are many people working with R because large companies like Google use it. The same is probably true for Python as well, but I’m not as familiar with it.
I believe the only reasons MATLAB persists are Simulink and a C code generation engine that outputs embeddable code that conforms to some regulation or other in the engineering world. Does gnu octave have similar features? I’ve spent a while looking fruitlessly for python-based alternatives…
Wonder how Rust changes that game - honestly easier to learn than MATLAB…
Coming from a more science/engineering background than a cs/programming one and having tried both, I wholeheartedly disagree. Or at least it’s a higher floor and lower ceiling situation.
And from an engineering industry standpoint the transition cost (or at least compatibility) from generated C, and the lack of a simulink-like block implementation/visualization and code generation pipeline still make it a hard sell. The block thing isn’t just for comfort in those circles, it’s to do with industry standards for system definitions and representation.
Don’t get me wrong I wish Rust changed that game: I hate MATLAB with a passion; I’m just pessimistic.
$500/yr is not that much.
people aren’t usually paying for these licenses, their employers are.
When was the last time you were a student?
Also, there is a reason you want students to use your product before hit the work place, as they bring the interest in the product.
about 2 years ago, why?
You make me remember a dude when I was a student who berated others who had cash problems (we all had the same state loans), turns out his parents funneled him 7.000SKR every month on top of what we all got.
I think it’s a little insulting. When I was a student I got Matlab free through my university.
At a job, your employer pays for Matlab if they expect you to use it.
Frankly, I hate Matlab. But it is silly to act like the cost of an individual license is much of a factor, that cost is so little compared to your salary most companies do not care
“got for free”
you know your uni is payong for it most likely?
with either tuition fees, or even subsidies from those tax payers, in the second case, Matlab is stealing literally the people’s money
do I have to tell you why this is clearly fucking insane? Do I have to tell you that most universities don’t have the fucking budget to pay for corporate slop software that forces lockin into their ecosystem?
Hey, you seem to think I actually like this situation - but I don’t.
I actually fully agree, but the reality is that the original post is not representing anything meaningful for moving people off of Matlab -> Octave. The tweet is over-dramatic and also written by AI.
I think it’s worth being critical instead of falling into a circle jerk here. Octave has a ways to go before it can kill Matlab. I’d love to see it happen!
“I got it for free”
“500€ isn’t that much”
You’re digging that hole you put yourself in deeper.
Hey, I think you aren’t really understanding my stance here. Please see comment https://lemdro.id/comment/22830764
“Am I out of touch? No, I’m sure it’s everyone else.”
people aren’t usually paying for these licenses, their employers are.
For the average employee yes, but this disadvantages entrepreneurs, unemployed people who want to develop their skills, independent researchers, etc.
agreed!
You have a point here. It’s not so much the employees are choosing the software. Employers are telling the Employees which software they have invested in.
(Edit)
Or which service contract they have paid for. Big companies want to have someone they can call when the tool doesn’t work as expected.
yeah, I don’t think people really understand what I was saying.
I love Octave, I hate Matlab. but the price isn’t high enough to cause companies to shift in any meaningful way (especially in aerospace).
The twitter post feels like an AI written fever dream of Matlab dying (it isn’t x, it’s y).
Grad students have license provided by their university, research lab, or company. Doesn’t mean I like it…
Matlab is 900 per year for an individual license. Simulink is 1500 and every toolbox (from which there are more than 100) is another 500. Also thinks like the compiler or parallal processing are toolboxes and not included in the base price.
