Slashdot Mirror


Wolfram Research Releases Mathematica 7

mblase writes "Wolfram Research has released the seventh version of Mathematica, and it does a lot more than symbolic algebra. New features range from things as simple as cut-and-paste integration with Microsoft Word's Equation Editor to instant 3D models of mathematical objects to the most expensive clone of Photoshop ever. Full suites of genome, chemical, weather, astronomical, financial, and geodesic data (or support for same) is designed to make Mathematica as invaluable for scientific research as it is for mathematics."

36 of 234 comments (clear)

  1. Slashvertisement by Bananenrepublik · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "[It] is designed to make Mathematica as invaluable for scientific research as it is for mathematics." Cut down the advertising please. Or at least advertize some free software. It's been a while since I needes a computer algebra system. How are the free alternatives coming along? Any recommendations?

    1. Re:Slashvertisement by Flying+Scotsman · · Score: 4, Interesting

      How are the free alternatives coming along? Any recommendations?

      I've used Maxima with good results. Not quite Mathematica, though.

    2. Re:Slashvertisement by SQLGuru · · Score: 4, Informative

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_computer_algebra_systems

      Take your pick. Some will obviously be better suited to your needs (or lack of needs) as appropriate.

      Layne

    3. Re:Slashvertisement by mblase · · Score: 4, Informative

      No advertising here, just a happy math nerd who was recently investigating alternatives like Maxima and SciLab himself recently, and was impressed that the new version of Mathematica leapfrogged them all by doing much more instead of just doing what it does faster.

      (This despite the fact that Mathematica is, and nearly always has been, far more number-crunching power than I've ever needed in my academic or professional career.)

    4. Re:Slashvertisement by navyjeff · · Score: 5, Insightful

      does it matter that it's open source or not? Open source is not inherently better than closed source.

      Being able to show exactly which steps a CAS went through to arrive at a solution can be important. With Mathematica, you have to trust that the methods they use, which you can't see, are legitimate and don't introduce any unforeseen error.
      I don't mean to pooh-pooh Mathematica; it's an excellent program. But being able to show 100% of your work has intrinsic value.

    5. Re:Slashvertisement by Xamusk · · Score: 5, Informative

      Sage http://sagemath.org/ is coming pretty good. Version 3.2 will come out in just a few days.

      And you can use Mathematica, Matlab, Maple, Magma, Maxima, etc from inside Sage if you have those programs available.

    6. Re:Slashvertisement by TiberSeptm · · Score: 4, Informative

      For what it does, Maxima is pretty good. It's fairly easy to use compared to the other big free alternative. That being said, it is fairly limited compared to Mathematica, Maple or Sage. If you need it to be free and need more features, check out sage (www.sagemath.org) but don't expect to produce anything useful in the first minute. If you're looking for a basic accessible CAS, then Sage wouldn't be the answer. In that case, Maxima might do it for you. Sage is more useful for people who need a more robust system, but I have often found I can write my own tools faster than I can do it in some of the free alternatives.

    7. Re:Slashvertisement by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      With Mathematica, you have to trust that the methods they use, which you can't see, are legitimate and don't introduce any unforeseen error.

      Absolutely.

      I work on pretty much a daily basis with computer algebra systems. In my work, I am using CAS systems to perform integrals on what would be otherwise an unmanageable amount of equations, in order to generate some nice neat, but still quite large matrices. Despite its obvious technical inferiority, I'm using Maxima to do this. A lot of this has to do with running Mathematica and the like on Linux, which is a painful process, but the peer reviewable nature of an open source system is another major factor.

      I've said this before, but essentially Mathematica is the modern mathematical Oracle at Delphi; arcane, totally inscrutable, and regarded by almost everyone as infallible. You cannot use its results professional for anything other than integral tables or the like. At least, not in mathematics. Maybe physicists use it, but I'd have my doubts. (Engineers? ... well they're a heathen lot anyway...)

      True, Mathematica is useful. But it's closed source nature, combined with its almost universal presence in scientific research is very troubling.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    8. Re:Slashvertisement by lexDysic · · Score: 3, Informative

      Another vote here for Sage. On the open-source side of things, nothing comes close, because everything else that's any good (Maxima for example) is included within Sage, in a fairly transparent way. (I.e., the user doesn't need to know she's using Maxima.) Secondly, the (free) support is awesome. If you spend a little while learning Python and the basics of Sage, and you still have questions, the response time at sage-support at googlegroups is incredible.

      --
      Think! It ain't illegal yet!
      George Clinton
    9. Re:Slashvertisement by bcrowell · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Wikipedia list is very long. For anyone who's specifically interested in OSS that runs on Linux, here are some of my impressions:

      • Maxima - In my experience, it's very mature and bug-free. It's only suitable for interactice use; e.g., if you do certain integrals, it will ask you whether a particular constant occurring in the integrand is positive.
      • Yacas - Unlike Maxima, is designed to be suitable for both interactive and noninteractive use. Somewhat buggy, and fails more often than Maxima does.
      • Axiom - Has a complete implementation of the Risch algorithm, so it can do some integrals that other programs can't. E.g., it can integrate 1/(x^4-8*x^3+8*x^2-8*x+7), and so can Maxima, but Yacas can't.
      • Sage - Pros: Sage lets you program in python, so if you want to mix in some general-purpose programming, python libraries, etc., you can. Sage implements arbitrary-precision arithmetic much more efficiently than programs that use the GMP library. (E.g., sage computes (2^123456789-1)%(2^12345678-1) in about 10 s, whereas ordinary python takes longer to evaluate (2**123456789-1)%(2**12345678-1) than I was willing to wait.) Cons: It's basically a hairball of other math packages, and the interface to other packages often doesn't seem to be very good. It's not packaged properly for debian/ubuntu. The tutorial shows you how to do lots of fancy things using examples from abstract algebra, but doesn't tell you ordinary, useful things, like how to integrate x^a.
  2. I think I'll pass. by muuh-gnu · · Score: 5, Funny

    A slashvertisment suggestion for tomorrow:

    "The Pirate Bay also Releases Mathematica 7"

    1. Re:I think I'll pass. by muuh-gnu · · Score: 5, Insightful

      >That would be nice,

      It is.

      >but doesn't solve the problem

      It will.

      >of Mathemitca's notorious copy protection.

      The Pirate Bay verison of mathematica usually includes protection from copy protection.

      >From what I hear, even legitimate owners often have trouble getting past it.

      Legitimate owners of ANY copy protection system are generally having orders of magnitude more problems with those systems than users who just get clean copies at their Pirate Bay.

    2. Re:I think I'll pass. by X0563511 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      OK, perhaps I should explain something.

      1. Release team
      2. Initial distribution (closed FTP, IRC etc)
      3. Usenet
      4. P2P (Torrents, Kademlia, etc)

      The pirate bay folks don't do anything except shuffle bits.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
  3. From my point of view by thermian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This just seems like its got so bloated that it will likely be priced beyond the budget of most students.

    I don't see why we have to have these all encompassing suites anyway, what's wrong with small tools at low cost which work together?
    Its most likely that students who want but can't afford this will hit the torrent trackers, which isn't really what we want.

    --
    A learning experience is one of those things that say, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' - D. Adams
    1. Re:From my point of view by muuh-gnu · · Score: 4, Informative

      >This just seems like its got so bloated that it will likely be priced beyond the budget of most students.

      It isnt aimed at students.

      >what's wrong with small tools at low cost which work together?

      Wolfram does not want you to work with any competitor's product. He wants you to raise a mortgage in order to be able to pay for his "complete solution".

      >which isn't really what we want.

      Except it really is what most of us want. Why shouldn't it?

    2. Re:From my point of view by addaon · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The student version is cheap (free at most decent universities). The Wolfram folk are great if you need a deviation on the license for student stuff (running on a multi-processor machine before multiple kernel executions were included in the default license); just ask. As a long-time student, Mathematica is the greatest tool out there, and is the only software out there where I'm consistently excited about no versions, and /always/ find ways to incorporate at least a few of the new features in my existing notebooks. With Mathematica 6, Manipulate[] was an absolute game changer. With Mathematica 7, I'm betting ParallelTable[] and the new charting features will be just as big a deal, for me.

      --

      I've had this sig for three days.
    3. Re:From my point of view by fm6 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you're a student, you can get a copy that expires after a year for $150. Not cheap, but in the same range as your (overpriced) physics textbook.

      Me, I have no professional or educational requirement for the thing, but I'd like to have a copy for self-education purposes. But $2K is a bit much. I suppose 5 or 6 would be adequate for that purpose. $150 on eBay.

      It's interesting that Mathematica is still supported on MacOS, Linux (including Itanium!) and Solaris. Support for AIX only disappeared recently. Supporting all those platforms does drive up costs just a bit.

    4. Re:From my point of view by Anpheus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Manipulate[] alone beats every chalkboard/whiteboard/overhead projector hands down. I found it to be a profound aid in teaching myself concepts such as curvature on a line or a plane and other things.

  4. Re:I love mathematica by djupedal · · Score: 4, Informative

    >Can't wait to see what new stuff they put into this.

    Other Recently Added Features:

    Visualization & Graphics
    High-Impact Adaptive Visualization
    Automated Computational Aesthetics
    Fully Automated Graph Layout
    Real-Time 3D Graphics
    Automated Table Layout
    Dynamic Interactivity

    Mathematics & Algorithms
    Integrated Geometric Computing
    Combinatorial Optimization
    Constrained Nonlinear Optimization
    Equational Theorem Proving
    High-Level String Computation
    New Generation Numerical Integration

    Computable Data
    Financial Data
    Astronomical Data
    Country Data
    Particle Data
    Graph Data
    Mathematical Data

    Data Manipulation
    Exploratory Data Analysis
    Symbolic Sound Support
    Symbolic Report Generation
    3D Printing & Scanning Support
    Symbolic Statistical Computing

    Core Language
    Unification of Graphics, Text & Controls
    Language for Data Integration
    Dynamic Graphical Input
    Instant Multimedia Programming
    Real-Time Code Annotation
    Instant High-Level Debugging

    Interface & User Experience
    Symbolic Interface Construction
    Integrated Graphics Editing & Drawing
    Built-in Gamepad & HID Support
    Streamlined Presentation Framework
    New Documentation Framework Dynamic Interactivity

  5. Re:Refund please by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 5, Funny

    Much handwaving, little meat, astonishing arrogance.

    Sounds more like his masturbation habits.

  6. Re:Fuck Mathematica by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 5, Funny

    Maple 4 was released in April 1986. You should really consider upgrading.

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
  7. Fuck Mathematica by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    and fuck Matlab too, while we are at it. I got a free hit of Matlab in university and then found out how much they charge for licenses only after I was an addict (had a pile of useful code that I didn't want to throw away). I am not going to keep paying for the privilege of running my own code and am busily learning Python.

    Mathematica code belongs to Wolfram Research, Matlab code belongs to the Mathworks, but Python code can be MINE! (and yours too, if I want to give it to you.)

    I don't buy into the virtual machines they are pushing now either; they might be free as in beer, but it is only a short-term solution and is nothing more than "free hits" to generate more addicts that need licenses.

  8. Free Alternative? Sage maybe. by TiberSeptm · · Score: 4, Informative

    The closest thing to a free alternative I've been able to find is Sage: http://www.sagemath.org/ Compared to MatLab, Maple, and Mathematica (yes I know MatLAB is differently purposed than the other two) the usability of Sage blows. It's pretty powerful sure, but when even Maple is easier to use then you've got a problem. I may give the new Mathematica a try. Integration with Word will make some of my lab writeups go a bit faster. Well, maybe as long as Mathematica doesn't take too long to figure out. Too bad our University doesn't sell it to students for $5 a pop anymore.

  9. Re:Fuck Mathematica by sakdoctor · · Score: 4, Informative

    Maple 12 life!

  10. Maxima by Brain-Fu · · Score: 5, Informative

    Maxima is released under the GPL.

    1. Re:Maxima by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Maxima also sucks. Here's a session from just this afternoon.

      [omf@midgar 14:45:36 ~]$ maxima
      Maxima 5.13.0 http://maxima.sourceforge.net/
      Using Lisp GNU Common Lisp (GCL) GCL 2.6.8 (aka GCL)
      Distributed under the GNU Public License. See the file COPYING.
      Dedicated to the memory of William Schelter.
      This is a development version of Maxima. The function bug_report()
      provides bug reporting information.
      (%i1) Q=matrix.... .....

      (%i11) Q.T.transpose(Q);
      (%o11) matrix([cos(t) (cos(t) T11 - sin(t) T12)
        - sin(t) (cos(t) T21 - sin(t) T22), cos(t) (cos(t) T12 + sin(t) T11)
        - sin(t) (cos(t) T22 + sin(t) T21), cos(t) T13 - sin(t) T23],
      [cos(t) (cos(t) T21 - sin(t) T22) + sin(t) (cos(t) T11 - sin(t) T12),
      cos(t) (cos(t) T22 + sin(t) T21) + sin(t) (cos(t) T12 + sin(t) T11),
      cos(t) T23 + sin(t) T13], [cos(t) T31 - sin(t) T32, cos(t) T32 + sin(t) T31,
      T33])
      (%i12) trigsimp(%);
      Universal error handler called recursively (:ERROR NIL
      CONDITIONS::CLCS-UNIVERSAL-ERROR-HANDLER
      ""
        "Couldn't protect")
      Universal error handler called recursively (:ERROR NIL
      CONDITIONS::CLCS-UNIVERSAL-ERROR-HANDLER
      "" "Couldn't protect")
      Maxima encountered a Lisp error:

        Error in CONDITIONS::CLCS-UNIVERSAL-ERROR-HANDLER [or a callee]: Caught fatal error [memory may be damaged]

      Automatically continuing.
      To reenable the Lisp debugger set *debugger-hook* to nil.
      (%i13) Q.trigsimp(T.transpose(Q));
      (%o13) matrix([cos(t) (cos(t) T11 - sin(t) T12)
        - sin(t) (cos(t) T21 - sin(t) T22), cos(t) (cos(t) T12 + sin(t) T11)
        - sin(t) (cos(t) T22 + sin(t) T21), cos(t) T13 - sin(t) T23],
      [cos(t) (cos(t) T21 - sin(t) T22) + sin(t) (cos(t) T11 - sin(t) T12),
      cos(t) (cos(t) T22 + sin(t) T21) + sin(t) (cos(t) T12 + sin(t) T11),
      cos(t) T23 + sin(t) T13], [cos(t) T31 - sin(t) T32, cos(t) T32 + sin(t) T31,
      T33])
      (%i14) trigsimp(Q.trigsimp(T.transpose(Q)));
      Segmentation fault
      [omf@midgar 14:48:25 ~]$

      Computer algebra systems are not the best to begin with, but Maxima has a very, very long way to go before it can compete with Mathematica. Most of my analytical work on a daily basis is done using Maxima and I can safely say that the program could be a lot better than it currently is.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
  11. Re:Fuck Mathematica by rcallan · · Score: 5, Informative

    Octave is a free version of Matlab, practically all your Matlab code will work in Octave.

  12. Re:fp by SQLGuru · · Score: 3, Funny

    After being denied internet access for 3 years

    Yeah, prison will do that too you.

    Layne

  13. Re:Fuck Mathematica by rahuja · · Score: 5, Informative

    You don't have to throw that code away or port it to an entirely different language (though Python rocks, and I wish my day-to-day job let me use more of it) Try GNU Octave - that's what I used to back in college because my department didn't have licensed copies of MATLAB installed/available, so-called student versions were insanely impossible and expensive to get hold of (Indian students can't afford $100), and I didn't want to pick a pirated one like the rest of the class.

    Possible the first open-spurce software I practically used (except playing with Linux).

    Code was very cross-compatible between Octave and MATLAB, except say constants like "e" and "exp" (and of course the MATLAB-specific toolkits). The toughest part at that time was explaining to the professor (who had no idea what "open-source" was) that I did *not* use MATLAB, but it would run on MATLAB fine if he wanted to check that my assignments work fine.

  14. API sucks by pzs · · Score: 4, Informative

    I had to write some code using the Mathematica API once, and it hurt. It provides a pipe of tokens, but if you ask for the wrong token, it hangs. You can peak at the front of the queue, but it's still the case that every time you want to read in a token you have to write code to expect any of a million different types of token for all the crazy error messages you never knew you might get.

    Also, the GUI is awful. That notebook metaphor just does not work. You want to remove a buggy line of code somewhere but it might be attached to another block so it's really hard to get hold of it. The navigation keys (pg up, end and so on) don't work as you'd expect in an editor so you become very mouse reliant, which is awful for anybody used to working in a programming environment.

    In my experience, Matlab is far superior although as others have pointed out, I'd still rather be working in Python. Numpy anybody?

  15. Re:Free Alternative? Sage maybe. by muuh-gnu · · Score: 3, Interesting

    >the usability of Sage blows. It's pretty powerful sure, but when even Maple is easier to
    >use then you've got a problem

    What do you actually mean by "easier to use", regarding a computer algebra system for doing heavy math? Clicketyclicking around without having to actually learn to use it? This easy to use mem may actually have some validity in desktop environments and generall consumer leisure apps, but I'm wondering to actually see such unwillingness to learn from people doing _MATH_, which are, by definition, required to be curious into how things work and not just clicking around and rotating colorful 3D surfaces the whole day.

  16. Re:But does it by ch-chuck · · Score: 5, Funny

    Mathematica 7 is so powerful, Linux runs on it

    --
    try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
  17. rich enough to use Mathematica? by mkcmkc · · Score: 4, Informative

    does it matter that it's open source or not?

    It does if you don't have $2400 to spend on a copy of Mathematica.

    --
    "Not an actor, but he plays one on TV."
  18. Re:Fuck Mathematica by timeOday · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have found one problem with open source toolchans - producing good quality graphics. At the end of the day you have to present the data, and gnuplot just isn't cutting it anymore.

  19. cost, features, and random ramblings by wickerprints · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I've used Maple, Mathematica, and SAS, among other products, for mathematical and/or statistical analysis. From a programming/features perspective, each has its own strengths--and weaknesses.

    I'll only briefly mention cost. These things are expensive because it's not like any random programmer can build this kind of software. Especially with Mathematica, these are heavily-researched algorithms that are nontrivial to implement. Also, the market is small for such a specialized and sophisticated application. Your average person isn't ever going to be able to use something like this. They barely know what the quadratic formula is. (They should, but that's an entirely different story.) You think they need to invert a 20x20 matrix? Or compute the Galois group of a quintic? Or even do a simple hypothesis test?

    As for the image manipulation stuff, I think that comparisons to Photoshop are a bit naive. Clearly, it's not supposed to be for people who want to do red-eye reduction on their family photos. It's not even for graphic designers or photographers. It's for scientists who want an algorithmic approach to adjusting their images, either for research or for purposes of publication. Could you do these things in Photoshop? Sure. Could you then say what formula or algorithm was applied to the image to produce that specific result? No. And conversely, you wouldn't do layer composition, masking, or on-the-fly tonal adjustments with Mathematica.

    FWIW I hate the copy protection on it too. It's infuriating and a burden to legitimate users while doing little to deter piracy.

  20. Re:I love mathematica by Skevin · · Score: 5, Funny

    Uhh...

    > High-Impact Adaptive Visualization
    It's got graphics now.

    > Automated Computational Aesthetics
    You don't have to graph things out by hand.

    > Fully Automated Graph Layout
    You don't have to graph things out by hand.

    > Real-Time 3D Graphics
    If you change your equation, the graph changes too.

    > Automated Table Layout
    Shows you the points they graphed.

    > Dynamic Interactivity
    It's got a GUI.

    > Integrated Geometric Computing
    Runs on a computer following Moore's law, hence "geometric" advancement.

    > Combinatorial Optimization
    Solve the Travelling Salesman problem by something other than brute force.

    > Equational Theorem Proving
    Okay, that could be cool... if the previous versions didn't have it already.

    > New Generation Numerical Integration
    It can use numbers now?

    > Computable Data
    > Financial Data
    > Astronomical Data
    > Country Data
    > Particle Data
    > Graph Data
    > Mathematical Data
    Since this is a list of "New Features", previous versions of Mathematica could not be used for these purposes. All you could do was show a fellow math geek how that humanities major had a really nice set of 80085.

    > Unification of Graphics, Text & Controls
    In previous versions, you were lucky if what you wrote or clicked resembled anything like the output! Now, when when you type in "y=x", you actually get a straight diagonal line, instead of one of the spirally partial differential functions we like to put on the cover of the manual!

    > Language for Data Integration
    There's now its own scripting language. Whoa, Mathematica never had *that* before!

    > Dynamic Graphical Input
    Use symbols you never thought possible! Like that squiggly "integrate" symbol, or that lambda derive-like thingy. Even use that upside-down "U" for set theory!

    > Instant Multimedia Programming
    Uses both Video and Audio! Include a Youtube video in your equations of Stephen himself telling you how wrong your equation is!

    > Real-Time Code Annotation
    Add "comments" whenever and wherever you want! No other language has the ability to "comment" on your code!

    > Instant High-Level Debugging
    Be able to step through your code and set break points! Stephen is the first person to think of it! No other programming IDE has ever done anything so revolutionary!

    > Integrated Graphics Editing & Drawing
    Did your equations predict that the Mars Lander was going to crash and burn? Use the Graph Editor to change the equation output, and show your fellow engineers a perfect atmospheric re-entry! Then re-sell those high-risk equations to an over-leveraged engineer who does care! You'll be long gone by the time they realize what you've done! This feature brought to you by the Lenders Association of US Banks.

    > HID Support
    You may now use a mouse and keyboard in this version, instead of simply shouting at the screen, hoping it'll do something!

    > Streamlined Presentation Framework
    Use an overhead projector instead of a video monitor to show your results!

    > New Documentation Framework Dynamic Interactivity
    We'd like to call it "Google"...

    Solomon Chang

    --
    "Twice half-assed makes an ass whole." --Solomon K. Chang