MathGroup Archive 2007

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

Search the Archive

Re: Re: Re: Re: v6: still no multiple undo?

On 6/9/07, Andrzej Kozlowski <akoz at> wrote:
> The idea that people always run the best software they could seems
> rather doubtful to me, but is completely  irrelevant. I think you
> completely missed the point of the article, which does not claim the
> older software was better, but only that a lot of new software
> (certainly not all) is "bloated" - a completely different thing. Did
> you really think that the reason I posted this link was because I
> would rather use Mathematica 1 than Mathematica 6?

Andrzej Kozlowski,

I read the article when it was linked from (I think) Slashdot a while
ago, so I have had time to think about it and form an opinion.
Basically, I do believe that software bloat does exist. However, many
features, while they may be computationally inefficient, are actually
quite convenient and useful. How many times have you lost something
beyond the first undo level in Mathematica? Wouldn't multiple undo
levels have been useful? I understand that the feature will decrease
performance (even further, heh), but I do not think the optimum
balance of features vs. performance has been attained here.



  • Prev by Date: matrix identity pointers
  • Next by Date: Re: NIntegrate with change of variables (discovering also a bug in Integrate!?)
  • Previous by thread: Re: Re: Re: Re: v6: still no multiple undo?
  • Next by thread: Re: Re: Re: Re: v6: still no multiple undo?