65

I'm confused about the differences among various Wolfram products. In particular what is the relationship among Mathematica, Mathematica Online, Wolfram Programming Cloud, and Wolfram Desktop?

Are the latter things I get access to through Mathematica (as I do with Alpha)?

m_goldberg
  • 107,779
  • 16
  • 103
  • 257
orome
  • 12,819
  • 3
  • 52
  • 100
  • 1
    Have you read Stephen Wolfram's recent blog post? He makes some remarks relevant to your question. – m_goldberg Jun 24 '14 at 00:26
  • @m_goldberg: Could you point me to the relevant remarks? – orome Jun 24 '14 at 00:55
  • Well, I thought he made some remarks that were relevant, but if they didn't pop out for you, I guess they weren't. – m_goldberg Jun 24 '14 at 01:28
  • 1
    @m_goldberg I also couldn't work out what the relationship is, even after reading that blog post. Could you summarise what you got out of it? thanks – acl Jun 24 '14 at 02:08
  • 26
    Summary: even Stephen Wolfram is confused about what the relationship is. – m_goldberg Jun 24 '14 at 02:16
  • @m_goldberg: Ah, yes, that I did get out of it. Relevant yes, but not useful. So no we have all of the above, Wolfram Language, CDF, Web Mathematica, and a few others I've lost track of — and what, exactly is the relationship among them? – orome Jun 24 '14 at 02:35
  • 8
    @mfvonh "The rest seems aimed at improving (renta)bility" – Dr. belisarius Jun 24 '14 at 04:42
  • 5
    @belisarius Yeah I'm pretty terrified we're going to get Mathworks/Adobe-style dropkicked – mfvonh Jun 24 '14 at 04:47
  • While I enjoy the anticipation/anxiety of speculating about a software product that (sadly) influences far too much of my life, isn't this question off topic for the main site since it requires the input of a Wolfram sales rep? – bobthechemist Jun 24 '14 at 12:55
  • 3
    Not to poop on the party going on here but shouldn't this question be on Meta? – RunnyKine Jun 24 '14 at 14:15
  • 2
    @RunnyKine: I think some of the discussion of Wolfram's business model may belong there, but the rest is useful information (and discussion) about the architecture of Wolfram's technology and products. – orome Jun 24 '14 at 14:35
  • 1
    Also, from Wolfram: there will be "a new option for Premier Service called Premier Service Plus. That will get you access to Mathematica Online". – orome Jul 01 '14 at 11:59
  • can do so by standard HTTP communication HTML is always broken!! which standard HTML there are 6 that break each other? anyone with google can find billions of "my html is broken" articles. Mathematica's language is much more stable. It goes over the internet just fine plain text: viewed with a front end. It does use TCP but does not use HTML. It's much more readable than HTML back and forth. It's not a brain damaged layout language like HTML "CSS" ".asp" # is - that tends to work for a few weeks only for particular people and give everyone else upgrade headaches. Mathematica's web browser f

    – the obvious 2 Jun 26 '15 at 01:20
  • WL (I prefer to call it Mathematica software) has since the late 1980's (i first used) had GUI for most prevailing desktops AND ALSO intnet able before people knew what the interet was. It has always been cloud enabled: "cloud" is not new if it is "used differently" or better by software wolfram is currently providing (use of WR's excellently designed one). Every copy of Mathematica is capable of it and of extending it. there's two parts to Mathematica (text input/output math solving) and front-end (graphics and editing). (5 languages styles and library extensible too) Newly there is more than – the obvious 2 Jun 26 '15 at 00:41

1 Answers1

50

For the TL;DR crowd

The Wolfram Cloud is envisioned as the precursor to the omniscient central computer often depicted in science fiction. It runs on the Wolfram Language (WL) and the Wolfram Knowledgebase (KB).

The Programming Cloud lets you write web applications in WL hosted on their infrastructure. This targets commercial developers, with a huge emphasis on tapping into the KB. It is not intended for serious numerical computing.

Desktop is an IDE for the Programming Cloud. In particular, it has additional interfacing features (not available in Mathematica) to simplify writing desktop applications that interact with the Wolfram Cloud.

Mathematica Online is similar to the Programming Cloud in that you use a kernel through a web browser. The key difference will be licensing: few details have emerged, but clearly they are going to use the license as a way to herd commercial developers into the Programming Cloud. I assume Mathematica licenses will have more computing/storage resources and fewer deployment options.

Mathematica will be much the same; most importantly, you run your own kernels. You will be able to login to the Cloud through MMA, but what you do there is subject to Cloud licensing.

All of these are separate products subject to separate licenses. Except for Mathematica, these licenses will require renewal. I imagine students and academics will not receive any discounted options for the non-"Mathematica" products.

ORIGINAL POST

We will of course have to wait and see, but it seems pretty clear to me what's going on. Wolfram's technology stack is based on the "Wolfram Language" and the "Wolfram Knowledgebase" (curated data), and although both are very powerful they have not been competitive for commercial application deployment for a variety of reasons. In particular, the Wolfram Langauge requires a Mathematica kernel, which is gigantic and (relatively) slow and (very) expensive, and the Wolfram Knowledgebase more or less requires the Wolfram Language and thus inherits those limitations. This launch is a major step toward tackling those problems by making it possible to deploy Wolfram technology without a kernel.

Wolfram has previously attempted to break into the "deployed application market" (if you will) with Wolfram|Alpha and CDF, but neither has been very successful in that regard. It was hoped that application developers writing in their preferred languages would tap into the Wolfram Knowledgebase using the Wolfram|Alpha APIs, but outside of consumer search systems (e.g., Siri) that has not gained much traction. A major limitation of Wolfram|Alpha has been that it requires pretty granular calls, which explains why it has made sense for search tools but not for data-centric applications. As for CDF, the player is just a disabled Mathematica kernel plus most of the frontend and the idea was it would provide a way of deploying Wolfram Language applications with a user interface to end users who did not have Mathematica. But that meant that to deploy any application you needed a ~800 165 MB player when the actual application would only utilize a tiny fraction of that functionality, and on top of that the frontend is not that great of a user interface for end-user applications. I don't mean to knock the frontend -- it's super nice for what it is supposed to do, but it doesn't stand up to Cocoa or .NET or (most importantly going forward) HTML5 + related technologies when it comes to building a polished, robust interface that will be appealing to the non-technical. And the only way they could figure out how to avoid handing out free copies of the Mathematica kernel was to disable it so much that it was not that useful -- most things have to be precomputed. (You can ask them to customize a player for you with certain functionality restored, but that hasn't turned the tables.) So while it has found some uses, CDF has basically been a flop.

But the core Wolfram technologies truly do have the potential to simplify/streamline development of many applications in markets where Wolfram currently has no significant presence. Enter Wolfram Cloud. The Wolfram Cloud is the umbrella for all of this stuff and is not specifically interesting in itself. The Programming Cloud allows Wolfram Language applications to be deployed over the internet in the "software as service" paradigm with no need for a Mathematica kernel and without the clunkiness of embedding calls to Wolfram|Alpha. This is already possible with webMathematica, which allows a Mathematica kernel to interact with the internet via Apache Tomcat (a Java webserver), but the Programming Cloud is advantageous in that you don't have to deal with running a webserver and can scale as needed. This provides a lot of flexibility -- you can write parts of an application in the Wolfram Language and deploy it as a cloud service, and write the rest in whatever language you want, and link them via standard HTTP communication. In other words, you can use the Wolfram Language for what it's good at (it cuts through data like butter) without being chained to it for things it's not good at (user interfaces). This is the most significant new product in this launch.

It obviously costs money for Wolfram to maintain this infrastructure, so it's not free. There is a free tier of the Programming Cloud that gives you a token amount of "credits" (= CPU time, basically), but the point is they want you to pay for it. If you have a paid subscription you can develop and test your application without using credits (with some limitations), but when you deploy it you have to start paying up. You can do all this in a web browser, and Wolfram Desktop is just an interface to that system. I assume it will probably run a local kernel for offline work, but the main point is it's meant to be cloud-centric and will be designed to offload computation to kernels (potentially many of them in parallel) running on Wolfram's servers, and is generally intended for developing and deploying web applications. The Desktop product will also have some systems interface functionality that will not be available in Mathematica, apparently. (See WSTP; tutorial). These products (Programming Cloud and Desktop) are meant to help Wolfram break into the commercial software market, and are not targeted at academics. Relatedly, Wolfram is working to bring kernel functionality (in part or in whole) to various devices that are not running a major operating system. This is a major fork in their technology stack.

On the other hand, Mathematica will continue to be targeted at academics. It will run on your kernels, not Wolfram's, and will not have substantial cloud-oriented features. You will be able to deploy applications to the cloud from Mathematica, but once they're there it's the same story as if you had written them in the Programming Cloud, meaning you'll have to pay for credits, etc. You can still use webMathematica to deploy applications yourself -- for that matter you could use MathLink to interact with whatever webserver you want if you feel like writing the code -- but it will be much more work than using the Programming Cloud. The upside is it will be less costly (the cloud credits are quite expensive) and you can customize your solution as needed assuming you can manage the other technologies that would be involved.

Mathematica Online is in the middle. It will run on Wolfram's servers through a web browser, so you don't need to run a kernel. This is targeted at users who work remotely, switch computers, want to work on an iPad, or whatever. Instead of paying for a license you own, you pay a monthly fee and then get "free" version upgrades and the like. Presumably the licensing plans will include some amount of computation on their servers, but there will doubtless be a limit. You'll also be able to share notebooks and data. I'm not sure whether sharing features will be available to those who buy garden-variety Mathematica outside of what's available with a free Programming Cloud account.

There is also the Discovery Platform, which is another commercial product. It will purportedly "define[] a new level of innovation capability for any R&D organization," whatever that means. It is integrated with the Programming Cloud and Wolfram Desktop and CDF technology, but that is all I have been able to discern from the sea of marketing babble.

So the bottom line is nothing major is changing about Mathematica, and these other products are meant to break into the commercial market. Which presumably is why none of the marketing material on any of this is written in a reasonable or informative way.

gwr
  • 13,452
  • 2
  • 47
  • 78
mfvonh
  • 8,460
  • 27
  • 42
  • but it doesn't stand up to Cocoa or .NET These are standalone apps, not something one can run in a browser like a CDF. needed a ~800 MB player it is about 200 MB? And it is one time download. HTML5 + related technologies when it comes to building a polished, robust interface This has to be a joke right? Javascript dat.GUI vs. Manipulate? ThreeJS Vs. Graphics and Graphics3D? Building UI with HTML and Javascript? I'll believe it when I see it. Please show me one advanced UI build with javascript/HTML5 now. A Full UI with all that comes with Manipulate. Not just a bouncing balls script. – Nasser Jun 24 '14 at 10:59
  • 8
    ..CDF has basically been a flop people do not like to install pluggins these days. Since Java applets is full of viruses, that scared everyone from plugins. Also not everyone can install a plugin. At school, we can't install plugin at computers in the lab or the library, etc.. So not possible to use CDF's where they can be most useful, at schools. This has a lot to do with it. – Nasser Jun 24 '14 at 11:02
  • 15
    Here's the crux: "...none of the marketing material on any of this is written in a reasonable or informative way". It would be great of Wolfram could take the time to explain to those of us for whom Mathematica consistently has been the single greatest software expense (by far) whether our licenses get us any access to these new (and potentially useful) features, or not. – orome Jun 24 '14 at 11:55
  • 1
    @Nasser Thanks for the correction about the CDF Player size. I was going from memory but either I was just wrong or it's gone down in size. And yes, people are wary of plugins for security, certainly, but as you note people also just don't want to deal with plugins in general which I think is the main point. And certainly many of the applets are more powerful than anything HTML5 has yet for certain types visualizations, but my take on this is that it's much more about bringing the Knowledgebase into commercial programming than the UI elements. – mfvonh Jun 24 '14 at 12:41
  • And as I pointed out, I like the frontend a lot for what it is supposed to do, with Manipulate being a great example of its strength. But it is plainly not suitable for commercial developers who want flashy everything. Imagine having to implement UI composites from creative in the notebook format vs. any of the other frontend technologies I suggested. – mfvonh Jun 24 '14 at 12:49
  • 2
    HTML5's catching up quickly, though. Here's one example: http://tridiv.com/ – mfvonh Jun 24 '14 at 12:51
  • @raxacoricofallapatorius I think the reality is they know the new products will sell themselves to the academic camp once they're released, and it's makes more sense to them to direct their marketing toward the commercial side and employ all the usual hype/publicity strategies. It's annoying but I understand where they're coming from since they are pushing really hard into a new market. – mfvonh Jun 24 '14 at 13:01
  • It's pretty sweet - worth a peek in a real browser just for curiosity's sake :) – mfvonh Jun 24 '14 at 13:03
  • You're totally right about scientific/engineering graphical applications, but that's not what they're going for here in my opinion. For those uses they are still selling Mathematica and CDF is still on the table. – mfvonh Jun 24 '14 at 13:05
  • 1
    @mfvonh - thanks for the writeup, well written. However, re: "you can use the Wolfram Language for what it's good at (it cuts through data like butter)" - I would say it's decent but not great - up to M9 there isn't even support for R dataframe (M10 introduces Association, Dataset). A 2013 Rexer Analytics report shows M not even in the top 10 data sci platforms (R is first). – alancalvitti Jun 24 '14 at 21:28
  • If Wolfram Desktop will include a local kernel, as the answer indicates, then does this mean that this product is, in effect, a superset of Mathematica? (A superset that happens to come for free, or perhaps at some lower that Mathematica itself, if you subscribe to an appropriate level of one of the Cloud products.) – murray Jun 26 '14 at 20:19
  • 11
    After reading here and on the Wolfram site, it's clear that WRI has done a really poor job in explicating the differences between, and the relationships among, all these new and old products. – murray Jun 26 '14 at 20:21
  • 15
    I have the uncomfortable feeling that, for some potential customers, choosing a Wolfram product will be like choosing within the line of one brand of dishwasher detergent: lemon scented, unscented, regular, high-efficiency, with added bleach, with added drying agent, etc. My own tendency when confronted with so many choices is to just run away. – murray Jun 26 '14 at 20:23
  • 1
    "up to M9 there isn't even support for R dataframe (M10 introduces Association, Dataset)"... That is if you have Windows. If you are on a Mac the Rlink is a complete bust, unable to interact with any packages, just the base R installation. I am really hoping this is fixed in M10.

    My workflow has transitioned recently from 100% Mathematica to 60% R, 25% Tableau and a little Mathematica. I don't see any reason why I will still be using M when my premier license expires next January unless the iPad app blows me away. I will shift my dollars to purchase a pro license for Tableau instead.

    – Nguyen Van Falk Jun 26 '14 at 22:33
  • @murray I am sure they will do something to make Desktop not a complete substitute for Mathematica. I'd bet it won't have access to JLink, NETLink, etc. and probably no/few parallel options. But that's just speculation. – mfvonh Jun 27 '14 at 21:17
  • 4
    I'm waiting for the price strategy of the now called Wolfram Engine, and its linking capabilities to standard industry softwares, like Excel. Until now, nothing of the cloud seems useful to me (or to most engineering scenarios), since I can't imagine linking calculation to the cloud, on the thousands of calls per second... either from Excel, CAD systems, etc. If it is like mathworks free MCR, then, it has a future in my business market. If they do it like the player pro, then, I will have to move forward... – P. Fonseca Jul 01 '14 at 04:50
  • 1
    Thanks! Would you care to add an TL;DR ? – Yves Klett Jul 01 '14 at 08:14
  • @YvesKlett Good idea, thanks. – mfvonh Jul 01 '14 at 14:17
  • 1
    @murray Wolfram Desktop does not at this beta stage seem to be a superset of Mathematica 10. E.g. ParallelMap is not supported (based on dialogue w support). Also, supporting local files, unit testing etc seems to be some time away. Hope that this only is temporary since the whole concept seems to be good. – FredrikD Jul 30 '14 at 15:22
  • 3
    Now "Wolfram Programming Cloud is now Wolfram Development Platform". I've lost track. Did they hire someone from Adobe to do their product strategy? – orome Sep 22 '15 at 20:09
  • 2
    It's also been kind of funny to watch them tinker with the pricing options since v10 was released, both for the cloud products and Mathematica. – mfvonh Sep 22 '15 at 21:05
  • 1
    It would be interesting to have an update to this: What can be said two years down the road? – gwr Oct 13 '17 at 19:22
  • 2
    The new kid on the block, "Enterprise Private Cloud", looks promising. If it would be better documented and way way cheaper it probably would be considered seriously in industry. At least by my company ... – Rolf Mertig Oct 13 '17 at 19:47
  • 1
    And now there's "Wolfram|Alpha Notebook Edition." One would think that would just be an extension of Mathematica's free-form input, but it apparently requires an entirely new product. – 1110101001 Oct 02 '19 at 07:48