Maple offers the same functionality as Mathematica, and is just as "deterministic". And Scientific Word defaults to Maple integration. For instance, the symbolic engine of MatLAB IS Maple! So is the engine behind MathCAD. Maple mostly sells its software base to other companies. I have never seen them, and am quite certain that the MatLAB userbase is much larger in engineering fields. I suppose in some places a few people use Mathematica for data analysis. Add in some really fast math libraries (MatLAB uses the best) and you are in good shape. Yes, you have to deal with some irritatingly expensive packages, but MatLAB is the best for most sorts of computation. MatLAB owns that market, and it is much easier to deal with. I have heard of a few others, but they all gave up and wrote FORTRAN code-easier to maintain. I have seen one person, ever, use mathematica for numerica computation, in any technical field. Lastly, from personal experience, Wolfram has top-notch customer/tech support. Wolfram also offers very attractive pricing for turning your student edition into a full edition when you graduate. You should at least inquire if that's an issue for you. I have also heard that Mathematica is more capable wrt symbolic integration and differential equation handling.I believe it is very inexpensive (much less than full price, if not free) to switch platforms with Mathematica. Apparently Maple is not exactly deterministic and you may get different solutions for the same input. As of that version, Mathematica's speed with numeric computation is supposed to have surpassed MatLab's.Everyone I know that used Maple also hated it (WPI for example was a Maple shop). That was back before version 4 (I think, though possibly 4.1) of Mathematica though. The combo is OK, and would be just as good with Maple.BĪ vote for Mathematica.UVM was a Mathematica shop, with the occasional MatLab thrown in for heavy numerical stuff (exploring image processing algorithms for example). Any more, I use Mathematica for a few integrations and symbolic plots, and Igor Pro for data analysis and graphing. The functional differences are for the most part trivial, and the interfaces are also quite similar.Mathematica's license is really irritating to deal with, as well, so that has really turned me off. Pick whichever one you are most comfortable with. MacSyma and MuPad are alternatives that work fairly well. Maple, or MathCAD, is easier to deal with. I know Mathematica, and I find the syntax irritating. There are particular branches of physics where mathematica is absolutely the tool of choice. If you are just using it for undergraduate class work, there is no difference between them that ought to really get in your way. For some more abstract uses, Mathematica has a strong community. Maple and Mathematica are mostly interchangeable computer algebra systems. MatLab is a bit easier-MatLab is a matrix manipulator, optimized for matrix and vector processing, and particularly strong withnumeric code. But please keep in mind that I'm a college student, so funds are limited. Is that far from the truth? Which would you recommend, and why?Alternatively, if you have a program (CAS) that you like even better than Maple or Mathematica, please feel free to speak up. Has anyone used both extensively? Do you have a preference? It seems to me that my professors tend to use Maple for matrices and linear systems while they use Mathematica for symbolic manipulation. It's marginally more expensive, but only comes as WIN or LIN or MAC meaning that I'd have to pay each time I want to switch OS's (which is not uncommon.) The idea of spending $420 vs $130 isn't one I'm particularly looking forward to.So I turn to Ars for a little help. As an additional bonus, the v7 CD comes with WIN/LIN/MAC so I only have to buy it once regardless of which OS I choose to work with.On Mathematica's side, I'm not nearly as comfortable with it, but I'm more than willing to learn if it proves to be a better program than Maple. Maple is $10 cheaper (a negligible bonus), but I'm used to it. I'm thinking about buying the student's version to either Maple or Mathematica, but I'm undecided on which to buy. Well, I've finally reached the stage where our professors take integration to be a rote part of the class, and instead focus on technique and process.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |