Mathematica A nice Maple-like front end for Mathematica

  • Thread starter Thread starter DiamondGeezer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mathematica
AI Thread Summary
The discussion highlights the features of Maple 12, particularly its document front end that facilitates the creation of scientific documents with structured formatting. It questions whether Mathematica 7 offers a similar front end, noting that Mathematica had this capability earlier than Maple. The conversation suggests that the choice between Maple and Mathematica often comes down to personal preference rather than clear advantages or disadvantages. While some users find the newer interactive notebook format of Maple cumbersome, others appreciate its strengths in specific areas, such as tensor computations for General Relativity, where Maple is considered superior to Mathematica. Ultimately, the consensus leans towards using the appropriate tool based on the task rather than favoring one software over the other.
DiamondGeezer
Messages
126
Reaction score
0
**Mathematica-Maple War Ceasefire Zone**

One of the nice things about Maple 12 is the document front end which allow me to write scientific documents with paragraphing and other facilities.

Is there a similar front end for Mathematica 7?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Mathematica had this ability way before Maple ever had it. For an overview of what's possible in Mathematica 7.x, check out Help -> Documentation Centre -> Notebooks and Documents.
 
Thanks for that.

It appears to me that there is very little advantage or disadvantage to using either Maple or Mathematica, only personal preferences which have as much to do with which package people first encounter as anything else.
 
Ultimately, I suppose that's true. That said, I personally find the newer versions of Maple, which have emphasized the interactive notebook format over the cleaner and simpler classic worksheet it used to have, to be quite painful to work with. Then again, any time I find myself needing to do computational work with tensors, Maple and grtensor are far better than anything available for Mathematica.

I guess it's simply a case of being impartial towards any particular package and simply using the right tool for the job at hand.
 
Its strange that for General Relativity, Maple is better than Mathematica. Very strange
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
7K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
37K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
17
Views
46K
Back
Top