Elon, from my knot hole...
mathcad is great for someone who uses it daily. It has it's own entry
methodology and style and that takes some learning. It is a great
documentation tool as it will write a report from what you have done and
with your inputs. I have an older version, 4.0 that is ok. I also have
mathlab which is similar but has other options like designing feedback
systems and so forth. Of course there is mathematica which is king of th
eheap as far as I am concerned. I have the calculus subset of that and it
works reasonable well. With excel, you will have to build all the plots and
things that mathcad does automatically with a stroke or 2. Go with mathcad
if you are going to get something.
mayf, out in pahrump
----- Original Message -----
From: "3liter" <saltfever@comcast.net>
To: "land-speed submit" <land-speed@Autox.Team.Net>
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 2:42 PM
Subject: IC Theory Book
> Dave & Neil thanks for the book title.
>
>
>
> What is interesting is you both endorse MathCad which is a strong
> affirmation of the software. So my question is; since MathCad is fairly
> expensive and Excel essentially "free", since it is included in "most"
> (but not all) MS Office suites, why would MathCad be favored over Excel?
> I have never used MathCad and would be interested in a comparison. Excel
> has a fairly robust plotting capability. Although you have to crunch
> your formula to get "data-in-a-series", once you do that the Excel plots
> are very nice. Does MathCad have more flexibility (or is it easier) to
> do plotting? -Elon
|