Re: Memory Blowup Issues
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg126876] Re: Memory Blowup Issues
- From: Szabolcs Horvát <szhorvat at gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 03:40:01 -0400 (EDT)
- Delivered-to: l-mathgroup@mail-archive0.wolfram.com
- References: <jqsa3j$dej$1@smc.vnet.net>
On 2012.06.08. 9:37, Bill Rowe wrote: > On 6/7/12 at 5:22 AM, ralph.dratman at gmail.com (Ralph Dratman) wrote: > >> Taming the experience of using the software, especially for >> new users, would be of enormous benefit to the company, since the >> software might then reach a far wider audience. > > Maybe this would benefit Wolfram. It isn't obvious. If there > were no additional costs associated with reaching a wider > audience (i.e., selling more licenses) there is a clear benefit. > But there are costs such as programming resources to provide the > "taming" you have in mind. An even if this entailed no > additional programming resources, more licenses sold will mean > more people wanting support and increased support costs. I don't > know what tradeoff Wolfram would want in this regard. But I am > sure reaching a wider audience doesn't come without additional cost. > >> It seems possible to me that Mathematica, in a slightly different >> form and possibly under a different name, could become for today's >> computers what Basic was for the Apple II and the IBM PC. > > This almost certainly won't happen with Mathematica. BASIC was > designed to be a beginner's programming language. Mathematica is > designed to be a very powerful mathematical toolset. And it > seems clear Wolfram intends to increase the power of this > toolset and extend it to additional areas of computation. To > really make effective use of Mathematica you really need a solid > understanding to mathematics and numerical computation, quite a > bit deeper understanding than what is required for something > like BASIC. > > True, if all you do with Mathematica is use it as a super > scientific calculator, you don't need any deeper understanding > than what would be required for BASIC. But, I would strongly > argue this isn't making significant use of Mathematica's > capabilities. There are far less expensive solutions for such > calculations that are much easier to master than Mathematica. Of > course, these lack the power Mathematica offers. > > You might find this interesting: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/qisot/im_stephen_wolfram_mathematica_nks_wolframalpha/c3xz8by Quoting the last paragraph: "It'll probably be related to my goal in the next year or two of making Mathematica definitively the world's easiest to learn language..." -- Szabolcs Horvát Visit Mathematica.SE: http://mathematica.stackexchange.com/