XML, why Mma is popular, was...Re: [Maxima] Lunch with George Carrette

> The key lesson of Mathematica's success is, I think, 
> disturbing. That is, marketing and glitz was more important 
> than efficient, reliable and comprehensive mathematical 
> computation. Technical achievement was not critical since 
> most came years later.

I find the lesson instructive, but not disturbing.  It is not enough to
have a good (or even the best) product.  You must convince potential
users to try it, and then adopt it.  You must make the product not only
be good, but appear good.  It's probably a good idea to throw away the
first draft (SMP was Wolfram's first attempt to improve on Macsyma,
Mathematica his second -- was Macsyma rearchitected in the meantime?).
You must ship on appropriate platforms.  You bootstrap whatever success
you do have into evolving both the product and the marketing.

I would be fascinated to learn the full story, but I get the impression
that Mathematica's success comes as much from Macsyma's marketing errors
as from Mathematica's marketing triumphs.

      -s