Once you step outside it, you need one library for the machine learning part of your project, another one for the computer vision aspects, yet another one for the reading of different data files. When you get to the 20th library you'd need, plus all the classes and wrappers you have to write on your own to achieve the same result, you start looking MATLAB under a softer light. That's even more for those who are no programming-inclined.
[1] http://www.nature.com/news/interactive-notebooks-sharing-the...
Browse JSTOR at the library versus Googling any historical, scientific or research topic and you'll quickly learn that "internet" offers the shitty version of surprisingly many things. (Shh... it's a secret.)
This is a bit presumptuous. I know people for which 200$ is a month's income. If you only consider their disposable income, 200$ would probably take 6 months.
Yup, startups have costs. Go figure. And sometimes you get what you pay for.
I wish I'd learned Matlab sooner. I still love the Python ecosystem, but Matlab's replaced a LOT of dicking around in Python for me. It does completely different things, and certain things are trivial or impossible in each place. Worth learning both.
[edit] in summary, in the age of open access, FLOSS science tools become a must -- and a collective responsibility.
If those tools make it impossible to share data, or publish results reproducibly, then I'd agree that those tools suck. However Matlab reads and writes every damn format under the sun.
Don't confuse "create, invent and build" with "export and publish." They're fundamentally different tasks.
And as others have pointed out, there's also Gnu Octave, which is reasonably (or used to be) compatible, and free. And where it's not source-compatible, it still largely retains the same semantics and underlying models so knowledge of Matlab can be easily transferred.
[0] http://www.mathworks.com/pricing-licensing/index.html?intend...
[1] http://www.mathworks.com/pricing-licensing/index.html?intend...