Mathematica 9 is now available
Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums
-----
 /
MathGroup Archive
2003
*January
*February
*March
*April
*May
*June
*July
*August
*September
*October
*November
*December
*Archive Index
*Ask about this page
*Print this page
*Give us feedback
*Sign up for the Wolfram Insider

MathGroup Archive 2003

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: Antw: pdf-export

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg44494] Re: Antw: pdf-export
  • From: "Peltio" <peltio at twilight.zone>
  • Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 08:01:42 -0500 (EST)
  • References: <BBC5445D.62E8%J.A.Solomon@city.ac.uk> <bo7pn7$ane$1@smc.vnet.net>
  • Reply-to: "Peltio" <peltioNOSP at Miname.com.invalid>
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

(I am sending this again since it did not show up to the group - I've
noticed that since I've changed provider I forgot to add a valid (though
munged) e-mail address in reply-to, maybe that was the problem)

"Joe Gwinn" wrote

>Very few of my collaborators in the engineeering world have even heard of
Mathematica, never mind have a copy.  Trying to convince my collaborators to
abandon Word is hopeless; they would just roll their eyes.

Perhaps buying Mathematica just for word processing is not a very good
investment, considering that there are free (but IMHO not as intuitive)
packages that can be used for professional mathematical typesetting.
And yet I wonder whether in Wolfram they ever considered the option of
turning the MathReader into a MathWriter (obviously without the
computational engine : ))) ). Since it is far easier to input mathematical
notation with mathematica than it is to compose puzzles in Word's Equation
Editor, it would be a tremendous way to spread Mathematica around - it could
even make it a standard in math publishing at the level of TeX.

>And I can just imagine the wailing if they tried to learn Mathematica.
>Despite the marketing bafflegab from Wolfram, Mathematica is not
>"easy to learn", it's a full-rank programming language,

Well, but as long as your collaborators do not need to write or run mma code
(and Word does not allow to do that) the only part of Mathematica they would
have to learn is that related to typesetting. I think that the real hurdle
is the cost (it would be like buying a Ferrari just to use its lights as
slide projectors) and the absence of 'hard tabs' and tables "a la' Word"
that make a notebook's layout essentially one dimensional (I had very
little time to play with a version with Author Tools but the way I've found
to put text and pictures side by side did not fully satisfy me ).

Of course people at Wolfram might know that many customers would not buy
Mathematica if a MathWriter were available for free, so why would they want
to give their work away for free?
But, seriously, how many people has bought or will buy Mathematica just as a
word processor?

> so people need to have real motivation to undertake such an effort.

Perhaps "Download the MathWriter. It's free and it's easy to input
mathematical notation with it." would work miracles. : )))
And there would be fewer engineers who would have not even heard of
Mathematica.

Perhaps I am too naive.

cheers,
Peltio
just wondering, nothing more.


  • Prev by Date: Re: Fluid dynamics
  • Next by Date: Re: Numerical Optimization of
  • Previous by thread: Re: Antw: pdf-export
  • Next by thread: Re: Antw: pdf-export