MathGroup Archive 2005

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

Search the Archive

Re: Re: Mathematica 1

  • To: mathgroup at
  • Subject: [mg62089] Re: [mg62051] Re: Mathematica 1
  • From: George Woodrow III <georgevw3 at>
  • Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 02:51:52 -0500 (EST)
  • References: <> <dkks3c$r87$> <dksdbo$h65$> <>
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at

There *were* two versions, one that required the co-processor, and  
one that did not. I believe that they were sold separately. The  
student version was the one without co-processor support.


On Nov 10, 2005, at 2:50 AM, Dave Seaman wrote:

> On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 08:52:08 +0000 (UTC), Bob wrote:
>> Andrzej Kozlowski wrote:
>>> I once had version 1.2 for the Mac, but I used it on a 68K Mac II.
>>> Mathematica itself came on floppy disks and even if still had them
>>> (which I do not) it certainly would not run on any modern Mac.
>> Why not?  I have plenty of programs from the 68K Mac days that still
>> run fine on my current G5 Mac.  Granted, there are a few that don't,
>> but I can't see how you can be *certain* that early Mathematica
>> wouldn't run.
> My recollection is that Mathematica 1.2 required a 68881  
> coprocessor to
> run on a Mac II.  Such programs cannot run in the Classic environment.
> It's possible there may have been two versions of Mathematica for  
> the Mac
> back then, one requiring the coprocessor and one not.  It made a huge
> difference in performance on a Mac II.
> -- 
> Dave Seaman
> Judge Yohn's mistakes revealed in Mumia Abu-Jamal ruling.
> <>

  • Prev by Date: Re: ((a&&b)||c)==((a||c)&&(b||c))
  • Next by Date: Re: Re: integer solution
  • Previous by thread: Re: Mathematica 1
  • Next by thread: Re: Mathematica 1