home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!ames!agate!doc.ic.ac.uk!sot-ecs!hgg
- From: hgg@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Harald Geiger)
- Newsgroups: sci.math.symbolic
- Subject: Re: What about MathCad...?
- Message-ID: <14287@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: 25 Jan 93 19:06:23 GMT
- References: <C0x2tu.8AE@ncifcrf.gov> <9610001@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM>
- Sender: news@ecs.soton.ac.uk
- Lines: 35
- Nntp-Posting-Host: diana
-
- In <9610001@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM> wayne@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Wayne Covington) writes:
-
- >digennar@fcs280s.ncifcrf.gov (Frank S. DiGennaro) asked for opinions
- >on MathCad. So in a further effort to provoke a response from any MathCad
- >users out there ...
-
- I guess that's me ...
-
- >Perhaps MathCad is shunned because its capabilities
- >fall short of those of Maple, Mathematica, and other commonly mentioned
- >computer algebra systems?
-
- >Wayne
-
- I don't think you quite get the point. Yes, its symbolic capabilities
- fall short of nearly anything else I have seen (incl Maple,
- Mathematica, Derive etc). I have been using MathCAD as an
- engineering tool since 88 - obviously for numerical applications. And
- I always have been impressed about its abilities to solve and display
- a solution. I have never liked the speed, though.
-
- Symbolic algebra as such is a useful add-on to a program which is
- really meant for something else. It saves me looking up all the
- integration formulas and computing the determinant of a matrix.
- And it still looks like I would write it on a scrap paper.
-
- And thats where my maths capability stop anyhow. As you guessed, I am
- an engineer rather that a mathematician. So I suggest you post above
- letter in sci.engr. and you might find MathCAD users out there. You
- might even find some in sci.maths.num-analysis.
-
- Yours truly
-
-
- Harald
-