On 2009-May-23 11:09:09 +0100, "Dr. David Kirkby" <david.kir...@onetel.net> wrote: >http://www.wolfram.com/products/mathematica/index.html > >and then comparing it to > >http://www.sagemath.org/ > >one would have to say the Mathematica one looks much better.
"Flashier", not necessarily better. Both these products are aimed at a technical audience and shouldn't need lots of frippery. For someone who was evaluating which to use, the important issues would be what features are supported and how easy they are to use (which makes access to a demo version useful). A more relevant criteria is probably how likely someone searching for mathematical software will find Sage (compared to Mathematica, Maple, Matlab etc). A previous thread suggests that Sage does quite well. >Would it not be worth spending some money on paying a competent >professional web designer, and charging him with a task of making the >sage homepage as good as the Mathematica one? IMHO, no. If the Sage Project has spare money, I think it would be better spent on improving Sage - adding features, fixing bugs or improving the documentation. -- Peter Jeremy
pgp6gpatx2MtL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
