Reject Closed Source Mathematical and Scientific Programs
Submitted by srlinuxx on Sat, 09/06/2008 - 18:06.
The modern scientific and mathematical community relies heavily on mathematical software for research and computations of pretty much everything. Unfortunately, from what I’ve seen, most of these tools seem to be closed source.
MathWork’s MATLAB, MapleSoft’s Maple, and Wolfram’s Mathematica are all giant , widely used programs used extensively to conduct research. Don’t get me wrong here, I don’t intend this as an all out blast on these companies, I happen to think these tools do their job pretty well. However, these are all closed source, and I find this to be unacceptable. Why? The reasons are simple, and boil down to basic scientific tenants, like transparency in published work and the philanthropic ideal to spread enlightenment to whoever is willing to learn.
Transparency in every aspect of your research is paramount in publishing research and conducting research. If I wrote some 400 page research article that concluded that universe was fundamentally made up of Wendy’s Baconator sandwiches, but on page 232, I made some outrageous statement and backed it up with, “trust me on this one, I’m right”, the whole paper would be moot.
re: Closed Source
I'd wager the chance of that happening sometime between slim and none.
First, it's big money - who would give up that cash cow (most developers like to eat).
Second, it's big money - and no one is going to risk their vested research on an application where there's no one to sue if it botches up the results.
Third, it's big money - as in Time = Money. Scientists look at software as TOOLS, not a religion, and they don't care what they cost as long as they get the job done, and they don't have to re-invest their precious time in relearning an APP that might kindof almost does the same as a closed source APP.
re: Closed Source
Regarding your second point, you hear this argument about open source all the time, there are so many contributors there is no-one to sue if the software screws something up. This is baloney!
I am willing to bet that if you read the EULA of any company backed software it will have a clause that states the company is not liable if something screws up.
re: re: Closed Source
Well there's your problem - you're using "logic" and "common sense" and applying it to law and lawsuits.
In the competitive world of research funding, when the brown stuff hits the rotating air mover - anything and everybody are fair targets. Having a nice big software company with a bag full of assets to step in front of the flying yuck is a safety net most lab exec's gladly pay the price for.
Scientists, in general, are pretty conservative, so an open source app needs to show a overwhelmingly clear advantage to the known and trusted closed source app or it will NOT be used.