RE: Re: Re: Not so Useful Dumb User Questions

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg9277] RE: [mg9214] Re: [mg9176] Re: [mg9148] Not so Useful Dumb User Questions*From*: "decker, mark a" <ormad at orntsrv103.micro.lucent.com>*Date*: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 02:46:48 -0500*Sender*: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

Originally, I vowed not to respond to any of these messages on this thread (though I enjoyed reading most of them), however, I would like to compliment Axel on his short and to the point message that I feel gets at the heart of the issue. I hope that people take his message at full value, it is a fantastic response. Obviously, Wolfram is having to divide its efforts into debugging/improving the symbolic/numeric nature of its engine and ease of use. It seems that Wolfram might be putting a bit more effort into getting the mathematics correct before ease of use. I think, as a mathematics package, this is a good idea. " I agree with every word You [Mark Evans] wrote. Don't forget that any software around for symbolic computation is in a state of, say, debugging. People are working hard on it, to make them work properly. (And think about, which sphere they must come from, to do this work right.) From the the day, Mathematica (or any mathprogram) works as reliable as mathematics, only ease of use will rule selling rates. And then they will read Your suggestion once again. So don't worry. --- Axel " Mark *** Decker ***