
Launching Today: Mathematica Online - lelf
http://blog.wolfram.com/2014/09/15/launching-today-mathematica-online/
======
williamstein
I have been waiting for "Mathematica Online" to be released since they've been
giving hints about it "coming soon" since about 2008. So this is a big
announcement. Us Sage developers have also been building something similar to
this, but around IPython/Sage
[https://cloud.sagemath.com](https://cloud.sagemath.com), and we've also built
something similar for embedding in web pages
[https://sagecell.sagemath.org/](https://sagecell.sagemath.org/).

~~~
oakleon
I would have loved to have something like this in school. I ended up paying
for mathematica while working on my degree. I think IPython/Sage connected to
an open-source version of Wolfram Alpha would be a Killer app. Any chance
Julia would be integrated at some point?

~~~
jordigh
Open source version of Alpha? That will never happen. Wolfram is the most
anti-source-code person out there. He even has this diatribe about why you
should not be allowed to see "his" source code:

[http://reference.wolfram.com/language/tutorial/WhyYouDoNotUs...](http://reference.wolfram.com/language/tutorial/WhyYouDoNotUsuallyNeedToKnowAboutInternals.html)

~~~
tjl
SymPy has made a start on an open source version of Alpha, SymPy Gamma,

[http://www.sympygamma.com](http://www.sympygamma.com)

The biggest missing piece it's missing is the data used by Alpha. It's missing
other things as well, but it's a start.

~~~
jordigh
I don't know if it's too late for this, but as a matter of marketing, why not
Omega instead of Gamma? Alpha was the first word on the subject. Omega will be
the last.

~~~
tjl
I wasn't involved in the Gamma aspects of SymPy. At this point, Gamma is
probably more appropriate.

------
tunesmith
I'm curious about other people's experiences learning the Wolfram language if
they're not already a mathematician. I've been tempted a few times, but the
language (and Mathematica itself) has so far struck me as one of those "Sure,
seems like it can do amazing things _after_ you already know how to do it"
types of technologies. As opposed to languages where you can reason yourself
towards the correct approach. It seems sort of similar to Applescript that
way. What was it it like for you to learn it, and how did you go about it?

~~~
spitfire
If you come from a programming background, just treat it as a Lisp with
M-expressions rather than S-expressions. It all comes together quite quickly
then.

At it's core Mathematica is actually a rule rewriting engine. but except for
more heavyweight uses you can view it as simply a Lisp with the worlds best
standard library.

~~~
larve
it's a great language, once you get past the fact that writing code in the
notebook is a horrible experience. You get a great lisp, along with pattern
matching and rule replacement.

I can recommend the book by Paul Welling, as well as the books by Michael
Trott (very meandering).

Just funking things up in the notebook is the most fun I've been having in a
long time. You just get sucked into trying more and more things, adding
manipulates around it, playing some more, taking the output image and running
image processing on it then converting it to a mesh on which you solve
differential equations.

~~~
spitfire
I disagree, I think the notebook is one of the best interfaces I've ever
found. Just not for "traditional programming".

The notebook is a literate programming document. It contains my thoughts and
process for creating an algorithm/piece of code along with tests and examples.
This is very, very different from how people traditionally "program".

However, Mathematica has some very real, very strong deficiencies if you
wanted to build an application end-to-end within it. It's dynamically typed,
with everything-is-a-list mentality. So you will get type errors.

Unit testing (let alone combinator libraries like quick check) are only
available at the higher price levels.

Warning personal opinions ahead!! Wolfram employees often have have strange
views on how software is built outside of Wolfram Inc. Unit tests are alien,
and type checking or datatypes (Say, to make sure that order your fancy
Mathematica based trading system is going to make is sane) are seen as only
things dumb rails programmers need. Rather than tools to make developers more
powerful.

I would honestly recommend every programmer learn Mathematica. I'm sure
they'll find that they can aim far higher when they have the right tools
behind them. It's the same distance again from Python/Ruby as Python/Ruby are
from C. Probably more.

~~~
jfklein13
> Unit testing ... are only available at the higher price levels.

Actually, this is now available for everyone, something I advocated for.
VerificationTest and TestReport are the key functions there.

Good implicit suggestion about QuickCheck.

We've supported unit testing in our Eclipse plugin for years, and with V10
brought the MUnit package into the System context with a redesign of the
essential functions.

~~~
spitfire
Yeah quickcheck (and smart check which minimizes the counterexamples) seem
like places where mathematica could shine bright for software debs.

I would absolutely adore seeing smart check implemented in Mathematica. Please
make it so.

~~~
taliesinb
There's the beginnings of an algebraic type system hiding in 10 (do
Get["TypeSystem`"], then try RandomData[Vector[Atom[Integer]]). So generating
synthetic data for a function with a given signature is already possible. Now
we need to be able to express invariants etc, and then minimize
counterexamples.

------
than
Worth watching again, the introduction to the Wolfram language:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_P9HqHVPeik](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_P9HqHVPeik)

------
judk
$15/mo is still too high for dabblers. It should have a free or cheaper tier
(with low quota, or $0.20/hr, bill as-you-use like AWS) for people who want
want to fiddle.

~~~
tachyonbeam
Allowing people to try it for free would definitely help them attract
potential users.

IMO they should just use a cookie to let you try it out for a couple of days,
and then tell you that you need to buy the product. It's easy to circumvent,
but a ton of people would just choose to pay for it.

I also think that they should have some kind of student pricing. Many students
couldn't afford $15/month, but they might be able to afford $15/year.

~~~
Niksko
Wolfram need to basically adopt the model that Adobe unofficially has ie.
don't stress too much about users pirating your software, because they'll
become so dependent on it that when they go and use it in industry they'll
demand enterprise licenses.

Except Wolfram should just restore Wolfram Alpha to its once free glory
(instead of the annoying nagware that it's become) and also offer this Wolfram
cloud stuff at a reduced price.

The end goal for them should be to convince people that they need to purchase
Mathematica. Pricing at $15/month means they're only really attracting
existing Mathematica users who want the convenience of the cloud when they're
away from their primary machine.

------
jwr
You've got to love the choice of names in the cloud file permissions
screenshot, chosen to sit alongside Stephen Wolfram :-)

------
bloaf
How is data security handled? If a company wanted to analyze some
sensitive/proprietary-type data, could they do so in Mathematica Online with
some confidence that the data is safe?

~~~
rhodin
There's a private cloud option coming, where you can link to internal
databases etc.

------
jayvanguard
This looks like the classic "we don't want to cannibalize our desktop sales"
pricing model. Nothing revolutionary here...

------
azakai
> We're sorry, the server encountered a problem and could not process your
> request.

is all I get. Is it working for anyone else?

edit: sometimes a reload shows it for a second, then it says "session
expiring" and the error page shows up again

------
JosephHatfield
This is the beginning of the end for the conventional desktop license, I fear.
Is the Wolfram Creative Cloud far behind?

~~~
Sophistifunk
Seems unlikely, I imagine a _lot_ of the users live behind extremely
restrictive firewalls.

~~~
kuhnster
I agree, seems unlikely

