Mathematica= the nuts - Page 2

Nsight7 · #11 10-22-2007, 04:51 AM

Mathematica is kinda OK. I mean it handles symbolic math fine and all, but outside of being pretty it isn't particularly useful.

Matlab is, of course, pretty useful, but as it is interpreted code, it is bulky i.e. slow. Better to write stuff in something like C++ and then represent only the results in matlab in graphical form if possible. However, the ramp-up time is much lower for matlab and, as such, it is easier for standard users to write apps more quickly with it.

If you are a fan of matlab, and run a linux distro (I use Ubuntu on my dual-boot lappy), Octave will feel very familiar and it is free.

AceLuby · #12 10-23-2007, 01:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Mathematica is kinda OK. I mean it handles symbolic math fine and all, but outside of being pretty it isn't particularly useful.

Matlab is, of course, pretty useful, but as it is interpreted code, it is bulky i.e. slow. Better to write stuff in something like C++ and then represent only the results in matlab in graphical form if possible. However, the ramp-up time is much lower for matlab and, as such, it is easier for standard users to write apps more quickly with it.

If you are a fan of matlab, and run a linux distro (I use Ubuntu on my dual-boot lappy), Octave will feel very familiar and it is free.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can write code in Mathematica as well. One of my math profs co-wrote a book on teaching Mathematica and he honestly could do anything he wanted (programming, solving, graphing, combinations). Actually there is very little that Matlab can do that Mathematica can't do.

Xanta · #13 10-23-2007, 05:36 PM

Maple is the least user friendly piece of ass software I've ever used in my life. That is all.

_brady_ · #14 10-24-2007, 12:55 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Maple is the least user friendly piece of ass software I've ever used in my life. That is all.

[/ QUOTE ]

I tried using Maple once and wanted to blow my brains out. Granted this is only based on one experience, but Maple sucks really hard.

Hobbs. · #15 10-24-2007, 02:34 PM

[ QUOTE ]

You can write code in Mathematica as well. One of my math profs co-wrote a book on teaching Mathematica and he honestly could do anything he wanted (programming, solving, graphing, combinations). Actually there is very little that Matlab can do that Mathematica can't do.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is true, but the learning curve for writing programs in mathematica is much higher than for matlab.

thedustbustr · #16 10-29-2007, 07:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Actually there is very little that Matlab can do that Mathematica can't do.

[/ QUOTE ]

perhaps in your discipline. mathematica is for theorists and academics. matlab is for engineers.

you ain't gonna prototype signal processing algorithms in mathematica. I'm sure you could to prove a point, but mathematica is not designed for that. You don't do much algebra in engineering, so what use is a computer algebra suite?

Maybe I'm wrong, I've barely used mathematica, but my physics II professor loved it. My theoretical math classes were Maple intensive. And every upper level engineering class I've ever taken uses matlab.

relativity_x · #17 10-29-2007, 09:36 PM

neither are used in industry.

armPitt · #18 10-30-2007, 01:45 AM

i'm beginning to like maple more and more for doing calculations, simple and not so simple, while doing homework. using it sort of as a calculator. the one thing i can't stand though is that i can't type "ans" like i can in matlab.

AceLuby · #19 10-30-2007, 12:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]
you ain't gonna prototype signal processing algorithms in mathematica. I'm sure you could to prove a point, but mathematica is not designed for that. You don't do much algebra in engineering, so what use is a computer algebra suite?

[/ QUOTE ]

I totally had to do this for a project. Granted we used Matlab mostly in that class, but we had to use Mathematica as well. It was a math/cs combo class (something like infinite math on a finite machine) and we did signal processing, image processing, and other similar projects in both matlab and mathematica. I stand by the statement that mathematica can do pretty much anything matlab can do. I had two professors I took classes with, one wrote the definitive book on Matlab and the other for Mathematica, and Mathematica 'can' do pretty much anything Matlab can do, though some things are mcuh easier to implement in Matlab.