I sure hope so, on a smaller scale. I fully plan to bite into Matlab's market with GNU Octave. Wish me luck, folks!
Yet, the replacement for MatLab appears, at least to me, to be Python. The abundance of resources due to its general purposeness swamps Octave/MatLab's niche tailoring. Python is a mire flexible tool for STEM because it supports a broader array of applications.
Julia looks like a fine language. Just not being Python is enough for me to assume it's better than Python.
But I'm describing is's not ought's. If I was in charge of the ought's third graders would be learning J. I'm not. They aren't.
My hope is to make Octave as obsolete as Matlab itself, but so far neither is. Matlab is huge and Python has not unthroned it. It will take a combined effort to do so. Octave is but another contributor to this effort.
MatLab is also often replaced by R these days.
There is a lot of Matlab code out there, and it needs something to run in other than Matlab. That's why Octave is still important.
Not quite. I am going try to to be the one doing that selling. I'm meeting someone today to discuss how to start that business.
Granted, I've only ever used it for school, but it is always incredibly painful to work with. I like Octave much better.
It was never "here's what it means to do X, and here's how to do X in matlab", it was "to do X, do this in matlab".
It seems like one of those tools that fosters such thinking.
The impression I get of MathWorks is that they would like to be the walled garden of engineering tools. Don't ask how it works, don't try to do it differently, just use these commands to do these certain things.