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

Re: Re: Re: Re: When is a List not a List?

• To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg91006] Re: [mg90987] Re: [mg90973] Re: [mg90956] Re: [mg90947] When is a List not a List?
• From: Andrzej Kozlowski <akoz at mimuw.edu.pl>
• Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 05:32:21 -0400 (EDT)
• References: <200807310656.CAA07700@smc.vnet.net> <200808020725.DAA24878@smc.vnet.net>

I don't see why you think your message was "ridiculed". If you refer  
to the remark:

> To quote from a related thread:
>
> "You and I, I'm afraid, just think differently." ;-)

I was only quoting your principal ally's remark to another user on the  
same matter and, in my case, it was of course a joke. As for the rest,  
I argued that, to me,  the Wolfram manual was a boring book to read as  
are all software manual? That happens to be true and I can't see why  
this is supposed to constitute a ridicule of anyone. I also added that  
I found Wolfram's book a useful online reference.

In any case, I am sure all of this is besides the point as far as  
WOlfram is concerned. Wolfram Research Inc. is not a charitable  
institution; if it thinks something is going to be profitable it will  
do so. A new printed manual would be huge and costly (much more so if  
it has to be mailed oversees) so the question is how many people will  
buy it and how much they are going to be willing to pay for it. My own  
personal answer is that the maximum price I would pay for such a thing  
is negative. I also have not noticed any visible groundswell of  
enthusiasm on this issue on this forum. I am sure if you and  
sufficiently many others wrote to WRI directly, promising to buy such  
a book at whatever it may cost, they would at least consider  
publishing it. Short of that, I think, you, and I think two or three  
others who have expressed a similar view, are just wasting your time.

Andrzej Kozlowski


On 2 Aug 2008, at 09:25, peter lindsay wrote:

> I said in a post to the group a few months back that the much lamented
> printed Wolfram manual was superb, and that it had clearly taken
> enormous effort and planning to produce. My message was ridiculed by
> one regular contributer but I still feel I was right.
> Wolfram really need to listen to their fan-base, if I can put it like
> that. We know that Wolfram read these posts.
> Come on guys, you know it makes sense. Publish the manual that
> Mathematica deserves !
>
> P
>
> 2008/8/1 AES <siegman at stanford.edu>:
>> At 1:15 PM +0100 8/1/08, Peter Lindsay wrote:
>>>
>>> just a crazy off-the-top-of-my-head idea here: Why don't Wolfram  
>>> publish a
>>> manual for Mathematica ?
>>>
>>> Peter Lindsay
>>
>> Amen!
>>
>> And question really is "Why?" ---  Why have they neither published  
>> anything
>> themselves, nor did they (apparently) even encourage or assist or  
>> promote
>> any timely third-person efforts during the (lengthy?) preparation  
>> of M6?
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> peter lindsay
> computing officer
> mathematical institute
> university of st andrews
> ky16 9ss
>
> phone: 01334463756
>
> Don't anthropomorphise computers - they hate that.
>
> The University of St Andrews is a charity registered in Scotland :  
> No SC013532
>

• References:
  • Re: Re: Re: When is a List not a List?
    • From: "peter lindsay" <peter.lindsay@mac.com>