You must be able to come up with better criticism than that. Number of people who work on the project, time it's been on github, contributors' employers ... these are completely irrelevant to the question of whether this project is a viable alternative. There's not a single technical argument here! :)
For what it's worth (not much), from a purely superficial standpoint, kdb itself started out as a one or two person project at Morgan Stanley! :D
We've managed to get this thing right in the hot path (not just for analysis off on the side, though that use-case is important too) where a significant portion of global trading happens, in one of the biggest investment banks in the country, and we've had it working in production for four years doing this (before recently open sourcing), having had to make the technical case to many people who are very aware of kdb and what it can do (as far as kdb goes, Morgan Stanley is Mount Doom!).
I mean, I take your point that it's not ubiquitous in the world yet, but in terms of the OP proposition that there are free and technically superior alternatives, it's proof positive.
For what it's worth (not much), from a purely superficial standpoint, kdb itself started out as a one or two person project at Morgan Stanley! :D
We've managed to get this thing right in the hot path (not just for analysis off on the side, though that use-case is important too) where a significant portion of global trading happens, in one of the biggest investment banks in the country, and we've had it working in production for four years doing this (before recently open sourcing), having had to make the technical case to many people who are very aware of kdb and what it can do (as far as kdb goes, Morgan Stanley is Mount Doom!).
I mean, I take your point that it's not ubiquitous in the world yet, but in terms of the OP proposition that there are free and technically superior alternatives, it's proof positive.