On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Perry Greenfield <pe...@stsci.edu> wrote:
> > On Jun 25, 2012, at 12:20 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > >>> > >>> Most folks aren't going to transition from MATLAB or IDL. > >>> Engineers tend to stick with the tools they learned in school, > >>> they aren't interested in the tool itself as long as they can get > >>> their job done. And getting the job done is what they are paid > >>> for. That said, I doubt they would have much problem making the > >>> adjustment if they were inclined to switch tools. > >> > >> I don't share your pessimism. You really think that "most folks > >> aren't going to transition". It's happening now. It's been > >> happening for several years. > >> > >> > > I still haven't seen it. Once upon a time code for optical design > > was a new thing and many folks wrote their own, myself for one. > > These days they reach for Code V or Zemax. When they make the > > schematics they use something like Solidworks. When it comes time > > for thermal anaysis they run the Solidworks design into another > > commercial program. When it comes time to manufacture the parts > > another package takes the Solidworks data and produces nc > > instructions to drive the tools. The thing is, there is a whole > > ecosystem built around a few standard design tools. Similar > > considerations hold in civil engineering, architecture, and many > > other areas. > > > > Another example would be Linux on the desktop. That never really > > took off, Microsoft is still the dominant presence there. Where > > Linux succeeded was in embedded devices and smart phones, markets > > that hadn't yet developed a large ecosystem and where pennies count. > > > > Now to Matlab, suppose you want to analyse thermal effects on an > > orbiting satellite. Do you sit down and start writing new code in > > Python or do you buy a package for Matlab that deals with orbital > > calculations and knows all about shading and illumination? Suppose > > further that you have a few weeks to pull it off and have used the > > Matlab tools in the past. Matlab wins in this situation, Python > > isn't even a consideration. > > > > There are certainly places for Python out there. HPC is one, because > > last I looked Matlab licenses were still based around the number of > > cpu cores, so there are significant cost savings. Research that > > needs innovative software is another area where Python has an > > advantage. First, because in research it is expected that time will > > be spent exploring new things, and second because it is easier to > > write Python than Matlab scripts and there are more tools available > > at no cost. On the other hand, if you need sophisticated > > mathematics, Mathematica is the easy way to go. > > > > Engineering is a big area, and only a small part of it offers > > opportunity for Python to make inroads. > > > It's hard to generalize that much here. There are some areas in what > you say is true, particularly if whole industries rely on libraries > that have much time involved in developing them, and for which it is > particularly difficult to break away. But there are plenty of other > areas where it isn't that hard. > > I'd characterize the process a bit differently. I would agree that it > is pretty hard to get someone who has been using matlab or IDL for > many years to transition. That doesn't happen very often (if it does, > it's because all the other people they work with are using a different > tool and they are forced to). I think we are targeting the younger > people; those that do not have a lot of experience tied up in matlab > or IDL. For example, IDL is very well established in astronomy, and > we've seen few make that switch if they already have been using IDL > for a while. But we are seeing many more younger astronomers choose > Python over IDL these days. > I didn't bring up the Astronomy experience, but I think that is a special case because it is a fairly small area and to some extent you had the advantage of a supported center, STSci, maintaining some software. There are also a lot of amateurs who can appreciate the low costs and simplicity of Python. The software engineers use tends to be set early, in college or in their first jobs. I suspect that these days professional astronomers spend a number of years in graduate school where they have time to experiment a bit. That is a nice luxury to have. Chuck
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
