terran@mit.edu (Terran Melconian) writes:> In article <7Dxec.53397$2G5.806614@wagner.videotron.net>, > Carlos Moreno <moreno_at_mochima_dot_com@xx.xxx> wrote: >>making that product *the* standard for DSP and many other >>scientific/engineering areas. Oh well, such is the world >>where we live :-) > > I knew somebody who used to work there.... > > They did it through *very* aggressive marketing and deep discounts for > universities and professors at the beginning, and a *constant* push for > it. I don't think they actually bribed anyone, but they got as close as > they could while staying legal. The owners of the Mathworks had wet > dreams at night about becoming *the* standard and did everything they > could to make it happen, at the expense of short-term profit, because > they knew it would pay off eventually (and they were clearly right). > > Good or bad, they got it because they *wanted* it so badly and were > willing to go out and make it happen. <shrug>At least it is a good product. The situation could have been much worse. -- M�ns Rullg�rd mru@kth.se
Graphical Programming Language
Started by ●April 12, 2004
Reply by ●May 31, 20042004-05-31
Reply by ●June 1, 20042004-06-01
M�ns Rullg�rd wrote:>>Good or bad, they got it because they *wanted* it so badly and were >>willing to go out and make it happen. <shrug> > > > At least it is a good product. The situation could have been much > worse. >And it could have been a whole lot better. If IBM had had some of its once characteristic vision, APL would have pre-empted Matlab by, what, 20 years? Still pisses me off what it costs. Morons. The R language looks to me at the moment as the very best candidate for a DSP language to displace Matlab. It's a real language, retains the excellent array integration of APL but as yet lacks a DSP package. If I could just talk someone into writing a good Matlab to R translator (in R) I'd have a DSP package for my own use in a heartbeat. Bob -- "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler." A. Einstein
