Re: "Do What I Mean" - a suggestion for improving

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg97049] Re: "Do What I Mean" - a suggestion for improving*From*: AES <siegman at stanford.edu>*Date*: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 07:09:41 -0500 (EST)*Organization*: Stanford University*References*: <gogc0l$oga$1@smc.vnet.net>

In article <gogc0l$oga$1 at smc.vnet.net>, Bill Rowe <readnews at sbcglobal.net> wrote: > While I understand this is small comfort to a new user, there > really isn't much else to be said. Mathematica forms a rich > complex toolset for doing mathematica analysis. Any such system > will require significant time and effort on the part of an user > to become proficient in making use of its capabilities. I'm afraid that this, if true, is small comfort to me -- but it's because I thought that the point to Mathematica was making a toolset with which many different levels of users -- smart high school juniors and seniors, college students at all levels, working engineers at BS or MS levels, professionals in many other fields without extensive math or computer science bckgrounds -- could do both analytical and numerical analyses, make plots, graphs, animations, demonstrations, in their own areas, **without having to invest "significant time and effort" (which they may simply not have) in learning the increasingly arcane, massive, and complex complications involved in working with Mathematica. The second sentences above says, "Mathematica forms a rich complex toolset for doing mathematica [NOTE: 'mathematica'] analysis." Freudian slip?

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: Re: "Do What I Mean" - a suggestion for improving***From:*Andrzej Kozlowski <akoz@mimuw.edu.pl>