Andrew Coppin wrote:
Lennart Augustsson wrote:
Why do you seem so in awe of Mathematica?
Oh, well, I guess it is only the most powerful maths software ever
written... no biggie.
No, it is one of several. In very little time I can find 20 things that
Maple does better than Mathematica. In the same amount of time, I can
find 20 things that Mathematica does better than Maple.
[Actually, the most obvious is that its marketing is miles better; so
good that it makes blind evangelists out of people who have not even
tried the competitors].
It's just another language with a good set of libraries. Claims that
it is the best, fastest, etc comes from Wolfram advertising, no
doubt. :)
The claim that it is the fastest clearly doesn't hold (much to my
surprise). The claim that it is the most powerful, well... I have yet
to see anything that can come close to the symbolic power of Mathematica.
Give Maple a try. For example, you'll find that:
1) Maple's DE solver beats Mathematica hands-down
2) Mathematica's definite integrator beats Maples hands-down
3) Maple's symbolic non-linear equation solver is best
4) Mathematica's definite summation (ie finding closed forms) is best
and on and on. [I don't know enough about the other systems to make
similar comparison lists].
You got suckered by their marketing. Get your head out of the sand, and
take a good look around what is available.
Jacques
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
