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

Re: Re: Mathematica 7.0.1.0 and some General Comments

• To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg97238] Re: [mg97223] Re: Mathematica 7.0.1.0 and some General Comments
• From: DrMajorBob <btreat1 at austin.rr.com>
• Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 01:03:09 -0500 (EST)
• References: <goqphr$lt2$1@smc.vnet.net> <got86p$ge8$1@smc.vnet.net>
• Reply-to: drmajorbob at bigfoot.com

> Humbleness and asserting one's unsolicited opinion are pretty much
> contradictory.

Rather unnecessary, I think.

IMHO.

Bobby

On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 05:53:38 -0500, Szabolcs <szhorvat at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mar 7, 9:36 am, Peltio <pel... at twilight.zone> wrote:
>> David Park wrote:
>> > There were hundreds
>> > of responses with some threads going to great depth. As far as I  
>> could =
> find,
>> > there was not a single mention of Mathematica and only one reference  
>> to
>> > using a CAS. Everything else concerned the merits of C++, Perl, List,
>> > Fortran etc. To  me, this again was incredible.
>>
>> It seems to me that the alternatives listed are all Open and Free.
>> Mathematica has very favorable student licences, but what happen when
>> the student leave school/uni? The price, albeit justifiable, is very
>> high for a yet-to-be-employed graduate. It may be better to learn basic
>> tools one can afford later on.
>
> Except that none of the tools above were meant for the same purpose as
> CASs/Mathematica.
>
>> IMHO.
>
> Humbleness and asserting one's unsolicited opinion are pretty much
> contradictory.
>



-- 
DrMajorBob at bigfoot.com