Re: Criticisms against Octave

[CdeMills]

I'm facing the same issues here. I'm trying to promote Octave use in my
research group. Younger collegues point of view is often: "I need ML so I
use ML. If the computer admin is too slow in installing the license manager,
then I take a cracked version. I need to do work NOW, on MY machine."

Using Octave is perceived as complicated, counter-productive, and so on.
Then they ask me why ML can't be used from inside some other software on
Linux stations (We have a few number crunchers). It's always a problem of
path wrongly set in their .cshrc.  Typing 'vi .cshrc' in a shell is too
complicated. They need to use a GUI client to sftp their .cshrc to their
Windows machine, open it in a graphical editor, save it, and sent it back.  

So, yes, the GUI is part of the problem; but it's far from being the only
one.

Pascal



--
View this message in context: 
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/Criticisms-against-Octave-tp4359058p4359207.html
Sent from the Octave - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.