Live data from Hacker News

OpenMusic

repmus.ircam.fr

11–20 of 26 posts

Re: OpenMusic

#11
post #10
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hello, yes, it required a commercial implementation of Common Lisp, of which a license at that time (and still today!) can be purchased cheaply, of which you could have downloaded the "Personal Edition", which has very few limitations, none of which concerning the language itself. And if you have asked for an evaluation version, you would certainly have received a time constrained full version of that in your eyes st…

Well, I was forced to use Windows+LispWorks in college and I found myself (and my classmates) shouting "stupid LipsWorks!" at it more than we should have. The GUI leaves a lot to be desired and it crashed on my face regularly, progress lost included. Exploratory programming was a real nightmare and I got into a workflow where I basically had to copy any progress into Notepad and paste it all back from the beginning w…

In no case I see insult - I just still wonder - probably having English as by far not my first language leaves a lot to desire in the way I try to convince someone to open a book before moaning "stupid".

"Well, I was forced to use Windows+LispWorks in college and I found myself (and my classmates) shouting "stupid LipsWorks!" at it more than we should have." - this is usually (at least in the context of LispWorks very unusual for years already (me personally have used it for about a decade in the last 14 years for production software) - I don't know in which decade you tried it, but at least in the 21-st century LispWorks has been pretty stable for the majority of it's users as far as I have heard, and some of them run trading platforms for example on it. Yes, the GUI has always been a weak point of the product, but to have a workflow as you describe points to errors outside of LispWorks - probably education, probably not having called a single time the support I have praised earlier etc. But the important part is not who would cry louder - you can gather the whole class and continue to shout "stupid LispWorks" - it's without value for all.

"If GP called it stupid he might have his own reasons to do so (even if he could've said it more politely). Dismissing his opinion because of how much effort someone has put into LW is not helpful." - Well - his opinion is uninformed, uneducated and probably insulting. He seems to be pretty young and more loud than knowledgable, so it has been a chance to help.

"The man hours of work mean nothing.." - Sure - it's just again unedecuated in that specific case. "..because as a consumer I don't care how much work you've put into it, but only about the quality of the product.." - I really don't know how a bunch of undergraduates can for so long not listen to their professor or to not call support and to torture themselfes with notepad and still long after finishing that school still not reflect about their experience and the right actions to take in comparison to just moaning. "...and still have which, based on my experience, is lacking..." - Sure, the GUI is and probably will be lacking in every Common Lisp implementation incl. LispWorks'. But if you have listened to your professor at that time, you would at least today know, that this has never been his main point of teaching with Common Lisp or that LispWorks is a tool for several companies running some important software without crashes. 10 years ago as well as today.

Whatever - the discussion/argumentation evolves to a kindergarden. My point, I repeat, has been to sensibilize the GP to some need for learning before categorizing the work of others as "stupid commercial". Either I can animate you or the GP to learn more or I can't. That's all. It's your life, not mine.

Cheers

Re: OpenMusic

#12
post #11
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I was forced to use Windows+LispWorks in college and I found myself (and my classmates) shouting "stupid LipsWorks!" at it more than we should have. The GUI leaves a lot to be desired and it crashed on my face regularly, progress lost included. Exploratory programming was a real nightmare and I got into a workflow where I basically had to copy any progress into Notepad and paste it all back from the beginning w…

In no case I see insult - I just still wonder - probably having English as by far not my first language leaves a lot to desire in the way I try to convince someone to open a book before moaning "stupid". "Well, I was forced to use Windows+LispWorks in college and I found myself (and my classmates) shouting "stupid LipsWorks!" at it more than we should have." - this is usually (at least in the context of LispWorks ver…

Sure, the only conclusion you've drawn from my comment is LispWorks is perfect and we're to blame because we were a bunch of uneducated undergraduates. Great attitude.

Perhaps language is not the barrier here?

> probably not having called a single time the support I have praised earlier etc.

A great support does not change the fact that software was faulty.

> his opinion is uninformed

Because he doesn't agree with you?

Re: OpenMusic

#13
post #6

Last time I tried OM, good 5 years back, it required some stupid commercial implementation of Common Lisp. Is it still there?

Hello, yes, it required a commercial implementation of Common Lisp, of which a license at that time (and still today!) can be purchased cheaply, of which you could have downloaded the "Personal Edition", which has very few limitations, none of which concerning the language itself. And if you have asked for an evaluation version, you would certainly have received a time constrained full version of that in your eyes st…

Cheaply? You seriously think that 1200 EUR per user is cheap?

Re: OpenMusic

#15
post #13
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hello, yes, it required a commercial implementation of Common Lisp, of which a license at that time (and still today!) can be purchased cheaply, of which you could have downloaded the "Personal Edition", which has very few limitations, none of which concerning the language itself. And if you have asked for an evaluation version, you would certainly have received a time constrained full version of that in your eyes st…

Cheaply? You seriously think that 1200 EUR per user is cheap?

I've seen this discussion around LW an incredible number of times.

The problem seems to be exactly this one: LW may be a nice product (many experience lispers seem to think so) or not (as someone on this thread is arguing), but in all cases LW's price is seen as incredibly high for today's sensitivities, especially given that there are very fine Common Lisp compilers around that are free (although way less refined, in the GUI department especially).

LW has chosen to follow this kind of 80's-like business model and it's certainly their right to do so. They certainly have their reasons. Although personally I doubt this road is future-proof (or even present-proof).

Re: OpenMusic

#16
post #12
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In no case I see insult - I just still wonder - probably having English as by far not my first language leaves a lot to desire in the way I try to convince someone to open a book before moaning "stupid". "Well, I was forced to use Windows+LispWorks in college and I found myself (and my classmates) shouting "stupid LipsWorks!" at it more than we should have." - this is usually (at least in the context of LispWorks ver…

Sure, the only conclusion you've drawn from my comment is LispWorks is perfect and we're to blame because we were a bunch of uneducated undergraduates. Great attitude. Perhaps language is not the barrier here? > probably not having called a single time the support I have praised earlier etc. A great support does not change the fact that software was faulty. > his opinion is uninformed Because he doesn't agree with yo…

Oddly enough, Overtone running in Clojure will give you a much interesting and creative musical experience than OM will.

(In my opinion, anyway.)

Re: OpenMusic

#17
post #15
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cheaply? You seriously think that 1200 EUR per user is cheap?

I've seen this discussion around LW an incredible number of times. The problem seems to be exactly this one: LW may be a nice product (many experience lispers seem to think so) or not (as someone on this thread is arguing), but in all cases LW's price is seen as incredibly high for today's sensitivities, especially given that there are very fine Common Lisp compilers around that are free (although way less refined, i…

I like the JetBrains pricing model, separating companies and individual developers.

Re: OpenMusic

#18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your points are all good, but you seem to fail to understand the reason why gp posted this comment. When seeing the Open prefix in the name of some software or platform, people usually except free things, because they've been used to it. Calling LispWorks stupid might not have been the brightest move around, but the concern was somehow valid.

The current version is free in several senses, though not all at the same time. The sources to OpenMusic itself are libre (GPL), and the OpenMusic binaries made available for download are gratis (they are self-contained and don't require your own copy of LispWorks). But you do need a copy of LispWorks to build your own binaries. It's free software, but depends on a proprietary compiler. I believe the main LispWorks d…

To summarise: I can download and use OpenMusic the source code of which is issued under the GPL. But to exercise my free software style rights to hack on OpenMusic and recompile the changed software I need to buy a licence for a closed commercial product.

Have I got that right?

Re: OpenMusic

#19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The current version is free in several senses, though not all at the same time. The sources to OpenMusic itself are libre (GPL), and the OpenMusic binaries made available for download are gratis (they are self-contained and don't require your own copy of LispWorks). But you do need a copy of LispWorks to build your own binaries. It's free software, but depends on a proprietary compiler. I believe the main LispWorks d…

To summarise: I can download and use OpenMusic the source code of which is issued under the GPL. But to exercise my free software style rights to hack on OpenMusic and recompile the changed software I need to buy a licence for a closed commercial product. Have I got that right?

Depends entirely on what kind of hacking you want to do. If you want to pull out parts that are portable Common Lisp and use those, you're free to do so. If you want to hack the code so the whole thing compiles on SBCL, you're free to do that too. Similar situation to free-software apps whose developer targets OSX: no legal barrier to using the code on Linux, but may take some work.

Re: OpenMusic

#20
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hello, yes, it required a commercial implementation of Common Lisp, of which a license at that time (and still today!) can be purchased cheaply, of which you could have downloaded the "Personal Edition", which has very few limitations, none of which concerning the language itself. And if you have asked for an evaluation version, you would certainly have received a time constrained full version of that in your eyes st…

Your points are all good, but you seem to fail to understand the reason why gp posted this comment. When seeing the Open prefix in the name of some software or platform, people usually except free things, because they've been used to it. Calling LispWorks stupid might not have been the brightest move around, but the concern was somehow valid.

'Open' once used to mean something else. Example 'Open VMS' from DEC. It was not open source, but developed to support 'open' standards, etc.

See also 'OpenWindows' from Sun, 'Open Genera' from Symbolics, X/Open, Open Software Foundation, ...

Post reply on HN