Given that raspberry-pi is an educational project and that Wolfram/
Mathematica is a well established and respected product, it's a pity that
Wolfram's free access via rPi has been a failure.
If one of the reasons for even computer officianados not being able to
'see' how to use it, is that rPi's slow response, often makes one think
; then Wolfram could have pre-warned of this.
Obviously the system has some , with
mention of 'Palettes' ..etc. and one would want to write/evolve scripts
and not be restricted to testing/confirming "2 + 3 =".
If they had just made a few well designed plain text HOW2s available,
instead of their amerikan-smart-arse always need to be live-connected to
Wolfram, they may have achieved the critical mass of users; which would
have got the project flying. Like the rPi did.
Why do I *SAY* it has failed: because the volume of rPi users, by previous
query here, and no traffic, and substantial tests show it's only suitable
for a maximum HosePower WinTel ALWAYS on-line setup.
Why do I say it has *FAILED*: because the intention was to get some of the
many new/young computer users using and dependent on their product, and
promote their reputation.
BTW, can anybody answer/explain/rebut any of the points/examples that
my original post raised?
Has USEnet degenerated to interaction/sparing between *people* rather
than sharing of knowledge on the *topic*?
Not really, except in the case of people like yourself with major
attitude issues that complain and gripe about everything at great
length and sometimes bury an actual question in the diatribe.
Try reducing the holier-than-though attitude a bit and you'll
get more topical answers.
You only go to the doctor, for PROBLEMS.
You don't discuss the light that works.
You must supply sufficient GROUNDS [not just a burb/frown] in your
complaint, so that others can either or inform:
"there's no problem, you just look behind, to find the instructions".
The fact that you don't read/write here to "get more topical answers"
proves that there are other valid reasons: Eg. you PROVIDE answers.
Others may wish to crusade/advocate...etc., which is still on topic.
When I make a mistake, I find it valuable to try to analyse 'why'.
Ie. the CONTEXT of the problem/answers.
Of course, this particular thread: "Wolfram failed with rPi."
has socio/economic reasons, rather than technical.
As does the higher reason of rPi's success.
When you're young, you just want to get over the current problem.
When you get older you want to avoid REPEATING mistakes, and you see
the bigger picture. I've been impressed by the TextToSpeech [which you
helped me get working] of Russel's 1949 Reith-lectures, and Keynes 1920
text --- compared to current FB/twitter ideas.
So eg.the *CONTEXT* of what's discussed here is:
* the unix developers selected the name as a spoof on Multic, which they
considered to be a failure;
* then later they said let's do the proper one:
plan9 ..... How can I ignore that!? Especially when the most valuable
software for me, are hardly used/known. Ie. popular NOT implies good.
Many *nix users will think "how can people tolerate the M$ crap".
But, can they accept that there may be ?
Apparently tribal-instinct which is the basis of all sports-teams is
very important? Heresy is not tolerated? Don't criticise your team?
} Why don't *YOU* do someting to fix it instead of just complaining?
Because perhaps there's no problem, since everybody else KNOWS that,
you just must turn it over to read the instructions.