Re: -- Wolfram Research QA process defect

Dear Dave,

Dave <foo@xxxxxxx> writes:

Have you considered open-sourcing your code? Parallel processing could be
used by getting a large number of people to hunt for bugs, in the same way is
projects like Seti

I agree with some things you say, but on the other hand, I think that Wolfram
and MapleSoft could just as well be grateful to Vladimir. Or did he so far
discover only bugs/shortcomings that Wolfram knew about anyway?

Finally, why doesn't Wolfram open source Mathematica? Yes, they want to earn
money. Even though Vladimir has bad chances, it seems to me that he would like
to earn money, and so far he chose not to do it via the open source
route. (Although I believe he would be better off doing so.)

Finally, I must say that I find it rather surprising that people choose to work
for Maple / Mathematica without getting paid. In fact, they even pay
themselves! Yes, I know, the free and open source alternatives are not as good
with respect to some important features (in other cases, they are better,
though). But why should we promote expensive, closed source software
unnecessarily?

Martin
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Is free software good for developers?
    ... Even though many Open Source products are zero cost, ... I don't think the idealists are necessarily the biggest concern in the ... In the music industry, the listener can distinguish ... of a song to know if they would spend money. ...
    (comp.databases.pick)
  • Re: Any experience with "The Last One"?
    ... >>making software to be given away, or software of such low quality or ... Open Source programmers fully expect to earn money by ... - Gerry Quinn ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Re: information suppression by universities
    ... Universities widen the Rust Belt towards both coasts. ... America becomes the latest Empire to bite the dust as a Mexican ... But the source of the money for research is often from companies who are using the research to enhance their companies position in the marketplace. ... We can argue about whether or not it should be all open source or not, but from industries perspective, not having the research open to all makes sense. ...
    (rec.radio.amateur.antenna)
  • Open Source vs. Commercial
    ... There are two arguments that are repeatedly used to attack the Open Source model - that it can't produce high quality software, and that it destroys the economy of software. ... Some people, and one in particular on Borland newsgroups, consistently claim that since Open Source software is also Free, it will destroy the software market and render all professional programmers unemployed. ... The assumption behind the argument that "FOSS = no software market" is that FOSS is made only by unpaid amateurs. ... The development cost a lot of money, which made the deal very expensive for the customers. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: LPC900/80C51 Compiler Toolchain
    ... There are some situations where commercial developers have advantages over open source developers - it is often easier to get restricted information from the microcontroller manufacturers. ... no top-quality open source alternatives (sdcc is, as far as I understand it, a perfectly reasonable compiler - but it is not a top-ranking 8-bit compiler in the same way that gcc is for many 32-bit targets). ... Any serious embedded developer can tell you horror stories of fights with licenses, ranging from broken hardware dongles, lost licenses after hard disk crashes or changing network cards, confusions over licensing policies resulting in waste time and money, long waits for license codes, issues when transferring the software to another computer, and other such problems. ... more manufacturers are going straight for a gcc port for newer 32-bit architectures, rather than the more traditional approach of working closely with a commercial developer. ...
    (comp.arch.embedded)