Mathematica and Maple comparisons

March 6th, 2014 | Categories: Maple, math software, mathematica | Tags:

I found these links a while ago and forgot to post them here. Some interesting insights.

  1. March 7th, 2014 at 12:04
    Reply | Quote | #1

    Wow, this is like a “editor war” of proprietary world. It’s much more fancy though, PDFs and whatnots…

  2. Ludolph
    March 7th, 2014 at 12:43
    Reply | Quote | #2

    Wolfram using very aggressive and unfair marketing methods. See, for example, Wolfram’s video on Wolfram Language (http://blog.wolfram.com/2014/02/24/starting-to-demo-the-wolfram-language/). This is perfect example how to sell something “new” (Wolfram language), what is definitely not new at all. Wolfram language is only new name for recent Wolfram Mathematica functionality.

  3. Gabriel
    March 9th, 2014 at 04:42
    Reply | Quote | #3

    Wolfram has been bad with the PR (case and point above), but they are losing their minds at the moment … Wolfram This Wolfram That. Everything is “revolutionary”, “the most advanced” etc. I am embarrassed at the moment to be a user of Mathematica, and am beginning to regret my choice to make it my primary research platform. I worry the company is coming unhinged.

  4. John
    March 14th, 2014 at 22:02
    Reply | Quote | #4

    It appears they have at least one thing in common: twisting facts to support their product

  5. Chris
    April 27th, 2014 at 15:30
    Reply | Quote | #5

    I notice Mathematica likes to gloat over things it does better but never gives credit when it doesn’t.
    Mathematica gives an unfair comparison. Maple is very fair. Maple is more open with it’s code, while Mathematica is very closed

  6. Chris
    May 1st, 2014 at 02:08
    Reply | Quote | #6

    Maple is far more advanced at solving differential equations