Mathematica v12.1
writings.stephenwolfram.com
Mathematica v12.1
1–10 of 97 posts
Re: Mathematica v12.1
#2Mathematica is worth learning and using since it's so far ahead of the open source alternatives (e.g. Python/Jupyter and associated libraries ) in usability/interactivity/rapid development that it comes across like future-tech.
Unfortunately it's also the single tool most hampered by its licensing and silo-like ecosystem.
Re: Mathematica v12.1
#3Mathematica is worth learning and using since it's so far ahead of the open source alternatives (e.g. Python/Jupyter and associated libraries ) in usability/interactivity/rapid development that it comes across like future-tech. Unfortunately it's also the single tool most hampered by its licensing and silo-like ecosystem.
I'm an R and sometimes Julia user, although not Python. Can you offer some examples of how Mathematica surpasses open source alternatives in those areas you've mentioned?
Re: Mathematica v12.1
#4Mathematica is worth learning and using since it's so far ahead of the open source alternatives (e.g. Python/Jupyter and associated libraries ) in usability/interactivity/rapid development that it comes across like future-tech. Unfortunately it's also the single tool most hampered by its licensing and silo-like ecosystem.
I'm an R and sometimes Julia user, although not Python. Can you offer some examples of how Mathematica surpasses open source alternatives in those areas you've mentioned?
It's hard to convey what I mean exactly by listing features, it's best if you use it yourself. Next best thing is to watch an expert use it.
Wolfram has released good videos to that end, here's the latest:
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/569938853
I find R to also be a lot better than Python and closer to Mathematica (especially if you combine it with RStudio and Shiny) but still not quite as good overall on the interactivity/environment end.
Re: Mathematica v12.1
#5Mathematica is worth learning and using since it's so far ahead of the open source alternatives (e.g. Python/Jupyter and associated libraries ) in usability/interactivity/rapid development that it comes across like future-tech. Unfortunately it's also the single tool most hampered by its licensing and silo-like ecosystem.
I'm an R and sometimes Julia user, although not Python. Can you offer some examples of how Mathematica surpasses open source alternatives in those areas you've mentioned?
How much symbolic computation can you do with R?
Re: Mathematica v12.1
#6Mathematica is an amazing tool, but it has one huge downside: reproducibility.
It is a closed monolith, and - especially when you start to use advanced features - you derive results from it that can't be independently verified because of the closed source nature of the monolith.
Re: Mathematica v12.1
#7Mathematica is worth learning and using since it's so far ahead of the open source alternatives (e.g. Python/Jupyter and associated libraries ) in usability/interactivity/rapid development that it comes across like future-tech. Unfortunately it's also the single tool most hampered by its licensing and silo-like ecosystem.
When I had the chance to try it, I didn't find it that easy to use due to the interface which felt clunky: the way the command line works: no feature to repeat previous comnand with up arrow, have to edit previous existing one, requiring more mouse usage, weird forms of cursor placement, weird default enter key behavior.
In ipython, matlab and octave it's much easier to repeat and modify last commands, which is something you seem to need all the time when experimenting with math.
What was I missing, usability/interactivity/rapid development wise?
Re: Mathematica v12.1
#8Mathematica is worth learning and using since it's so far ahead of the open source alternatives (e.g. Python/Jupyter and associated libraries ) in usability/interactivity/rapid development that it comes across like future-tech. Unfortunately it's also the single tool most hampered by its licensing and silo-like ecosystem.
Maxima is also an amazing tool for symbolic maths, and is free software. I especially recommend the wxMaxima interface which is close in spirit to jupyter notebook
Re: Mathematica v12.1
#9Mathematica is worth learning and using since it's so far ahead of the open source alternatives (e.g. Python/Jupyter and associated libraries ) in usability/interactivity/rapid development that it comes across like future-tech. Unfortunately it's also the single tool most hampered by its licensing and silo-like ecosystem.
When I had the chance to try it, I didn't find it that easy to use due to the interface which felt clunky: the way the command line works: no feature to repeat previous comnand with up arrow, have to edit previous existing one, requiring more mouse usage, weird forms of cursor placement, weird default enter key behavior. In ipython, matlab and octave it's much easier to repeat and modify last commands, which is somet…
You are just not used to it.
> the way the command line works: no feature to repeat previous comnand with up arrow, have to edit previous existing one, requiring more mouse usage, weird forms of cursor placement, weird default enter key behavior.
It's not a command line. It's an interactive notebook. It's an entirely different experience. Repeating and modifying last commands can still be done with arrow keys, then Shift-Enter. Also, when you are doing math, you spend way more time thinking than typing and manipulating; the time needed to move your hands to the mouse is minuscule by comparison.
Re: Mathematica v12.1
#10Mathematica is worth learning and using since it's so far ahead of the open source alternatives (e.g. Python/Jupyter and associated libraries ) in usability/interactivity/rapid development that it comes across like future-tech. Unfortunately it's also the single tool most hampered by its licensing and silo-like ecosystem.
When I had the chance to try it, I didn't find it that easy to use due to the interface which felt clunky: the way the command line works: no feature to repeat previous comnand with up arrow, have to edit previous existing one, requiring more mouse usage, weird forms of cursor placement, weird default enter key behavior. In ipython, matlab and octave it's much easier to repeat and modify last commands, which is somet…
Mathematica Notebooks have some REPL-like aspects, but they really should be uses like a script editor that shows the script output inline. You can jump between script segments and execute them out of order, which is useful in some cases. But notebooks are at their best when you have some discipline when editing, so that they stay in a state where you can open them, select execute notebook from the menu and everything works on the first try.