Re: More /.{I->-1} craziness. Schools are conservative. So are [people]

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg106882] Re: More /.{I->-1} craziness. Schools are conservative. So are [people]*From*: Richard Fateman <fateman at cs.berkeley.edu>*Date*: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 06:33:25 -0500 (EST)*References*: <hjbvc0$2tp$1@smc.vnet.net> <hjeqh1$g3c$1@smc.vnet.net> <hjh877$r4r$1@smc.vnet.net>

Nasser M. Abbasi wrote: > "Richard Fateman" <fateman at cs.berkeley.edu> wrote in message > news:hjeqh1$g3c$1 at smc.vnet.net... >> Andrzej Kozlowski wrote: >>> .... >>> This functionality is entirely lost if you replace an .nb or .nbp file >>> with a pdf. >>> Its usefulness obviously depends on the area one applies it to. >> 1. There is, by now, a well-established model for writing Java Applets >> for illustrating mathematical concepts. A google search will find a huge >> number of them. Mathematica, while providing a simple interface from >> the programmer level to (say) plotting, is hardly unique. >> And, I daresay, > > Yes, Java does provide the mechanics to run applications on the internet > offcourse, but for mathematically/Scientific oriented applications, it is > clearly much easier to use Mathematica simply because it has all the > mathematical functions needed already in place. > > Mathematica has 3,000 mathematical functions ready to use. How many does > Java has? Since most people don't have Mathematica and are unlikely to buy it, that doesn't seem relevant. Further discussion of Java or Python or other free alternatives is an invitation for Steve C to censor the discussion. > At this time, there is simply nothing better out there to use to develop > scientific applications intended to run on the web than the Mathematica > demos. This suggests that you have made an exhaustive search for alternatives, and that they all have downsides comparable to "high license fee". Your next paragraph suggests you do not believe this. > I wish WRI would allow all of Mathematica functionality to be available for > use under the free player version. (example, input/read in a local file, > input text, etc....) How about wishing instead that Java (or Python or ...) had a library of 3,000 mathematical functions? And maybe that you had a better browser that Java could not freeze? Either of these seems entirely plausible. If all of Mathematica functionality were available in the free player version, WRI would need to drastically change its business model. And even it it were free, we still have behavior like this: (..for some values of zero) {x >== 1, x > 0, x} evaluates to {True, False, 0.} RJF

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: Re: More /.{I->-1} craziness. Schools are conservative.***From:*Daniel Lichtblau <danl@wolfram.com>