Re: 64-bit transition deadline (Re: Etch in the hands of the Stable Release Managers)
Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
> On 4/10/07, Jean-Christophe Dubacq <jcdubacq1@free.fr> wrote:
>> For example, CPlex (a mathematical programming optimizer) is considered
>> much better than any free (even free as beer) program, having no
>> equivalent for e.g. quadratic constraints problems.
>>
>> Maple is also considered much more advanced than Octave especially
>> toolboxes available only in Maple.
>>
>> I may have exaggerated by saying 20 years, but I will not settle for
>> less than 10. And we need those anyway to compare results obtained by
>> one software against the other.
>
> This is interesting. I often hear people citing pros and cons of FLOSS
> and commercial stuff, but don't remember anyone stating such
> extravagant development gaps as 10 years or so. I'd like to hear
> opinions of others who have also used those Cplex Maple, and whatever
> else you may have in mind. This however brings to mind libre CAD stuff
> which truly lags behind.
Maple is far away from any competitor I've seen. It provides you with
anything you need plus everything you want, works in a nice environment and
provides you with a _very_ comprehensive help. I have yet to find any free
equivalent that has these three features. Of course, this is speaking from
the standpoint of a 3rd-year undergrad and not from a scientific lab
researcher. I haven't seen equivalent functionality to Maple 6 yet, which
was released on 1999, which gives you the first 8 of the minimum 10
required by Jean-Christoph.
--
Felipe Sateler
Reply to: