Re: Comfortable Octave usage on Windows

[Tatsuro MATSUOKA]

Hello

--- maiky76  wrote:

> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
> 
> I see that my pov is not shared by many people but I think that's important
> to voice it as it is just different and I believe that many engineers like
> me would share it. 
> 
> Bart said in the first message:
> “Now... slowly... some of them are trying out Octave on Windows. 
> However, for now, they are not convinced yet... mostly because they 
> are not as geekish as I am and they prefer GUI's instead of 
> command-line interface.”
> 
> I don’t think I am confusing the discussion by telling my pov.
> 
> I was trained exclusively on UNIX Silicon Graphic workstation for mechanical
> calculation ABACUS, Fluent, Sysnoise and I don’t mind Spartan environment
> when performance is the only focus.  I do get that Qtoctave is an empty
> shell without Octave but for many people octave with no shell is useless,
> it’s cynical but that’s MY point.
> 
> As pure speculation, let think if Octave could attract more engineers which
> represent a much larger population than researchers (who are making their
> own stuff anyway). The young engineers are now familiar with GPL and respect
> it. They will contribute to Octave maybe not by designing the engine but
> certainly by making toolboxes that in return attract more engineers… and
> will inevitably attract more money. Let’s imagine a large consulting company
> wanting to switch to Octave for budget reasons and pay the equivalent of 50
> Matlab licenses (I have no idea how much it would cost but as brilliant
> amateurs do it shouldn’t be millions of dollars) to make a GUI and then use
> it as Matlab replacement saving them big money.
> 
> We are still evaluating Octave but we will certainly give money (equivalent
> to Matlab licenses) and publish things as the GPL requires. 
> 
> I was impolite in my first post so please receive all my respect for the
> brilliant job that you all have done.
> 
> What about car extremely fast but with no steering wheel or brake pedals no
> seat no body work?
>  Cheers
> Mickael Lefebvre, MEng, MSc. 
> Acoustic team leader

If you think the above, you should work on GUI for octave for windows.
If do not like to work on it by yourself, wait when OctaveDE will work usefully 
in the future version
of octave or use GUI skin software to the octave such as QtOctave.

I am not now a maintainer of windows release of octave. However I have worked 
in early stage of octave
for windows version of which to be 3.0.

The persons who are now working on octave on windows are only Michael and 
Benjamin. (In this topic,
octave on cygwin is excluded now because It is unixy so that people who will 
use octave on the
terminal emulatorlike the rxvt or Emacs mode for Octave like other unix users.) 
 It is not still easy
job to build octave on Windows using MinGW GCC complier.  The MinGW GCC will 
not give less compatible
environments to Unix than that is giveb by GCC on Cygwin.  Some code written 
for octave for Unixy
environment should be rewritten using the  windows api functions.  Number of 
staff is too small to
give GUI facilities for octave for windows in main octave contributers.

I myself use octave build from source on mingw to use optimized BLAS.  In the 
the cygwin, the build is
very easy. However, on mingw, it is not easy task even at present.

Do you say that they should work more hard on the voluntary based job?

Please do hope much to the octave staff without helping their work by yourself.

OTOH, I do not have any trouble with from the fact that the octave is console 
software.
I have a class numerical calculation using octave in chemical engineer course.

I prepare the customized cmd console in which screen size, font, enabling 
'quick edit mode', 
increased screen buffer are prepared.  I made the instruction of the copy and 
paste facilities by 
'quick edit mode' of cmd.exe, auto complete-facilities and command line history 
realized by GNU read
line which is involved in the octave .
With this instruction, students of my class can use octave without confusions.

I think that console on windows (cmd.exe) is much improved from commad.com on 
the MS-DOS.
The cmd.exe is useful 'true windows' but not 'DOS' software to use console 
software conveniently.

However my instructions on the lecture are written in Japanese.  If there exist 
some people hope my
instruction in the class to be translated in English.  I willing to do it.  Of 
course, perhaps you
aware that my ability of English is poor so that I need someone to help me to 
convert my poor English
to good English.  In addition,  I have only Japanese version of windows XP so 
that snapshots should be
re-made on the English version of Windows (XP and Vista).

Regards

Tatsuro



--------------------------------------
Power up the Internet with Yahoo! Toolbar.
http://pr.mail.yahoo.co.jp/toolbar/