As you imply, part of your decision will be based on the relative math capabilities of M15 vs. MP6 and part of it will be based on integration with Creo, among other things. And, as retired Fred lamented, the younger engineers will muck up the best laid plans. I don't envy you. 🙂 Unfortunately, it seems to me that you may need to run both versions, at least for a long while, because you seem to need the more advanced capabilities of M15 AND the better Creo integration of MP6. If you only want to run one version, then which advantage is more important than the other?
As non-retired Fred, I have it much easier than either of you...except for the part about not being retired. Everywhere I have worked--from a small one-office civil engineering firm to two different multi-national multi-discipline firms and a couple in-between--I have been the only (or one of the few) Mathcad user(s) I could find. I have also been one of the few who still programs HP calculators. On the other hand, all the engineers I work directly with use and abuse Excel, even when it’s the wrong tool. I have encouraged the younger engineers I work with and mentor to learn Mathcad (or at least give SMath Studio a try), but so far only one has made the move and he just started. Thay all like seeing the Mathcad worksheets I prepare, but I am pretty sure they think it’s magic. In the end, I have never had to deal with a situation involving lots of engineers all using Mathcad and having different preferences.
I also have it easier because my math needs are relatively modest compared to what I assume you need. I deal mostly with algebra, trig, root solving, a little programming, a little calculus, small matrices once in a while, some simple statistics, the occasional symbolic, and so on. I am currently using MP 5.0 at work and I have a personal copy of MP 3.0 at home, and there is nothing in M15 that is missing from MP3 or MP5 that I need. One of the reasons I favor MP5 over M15 is the presentation quality of the output. I sometimes prepare calculations that will be reviewed by a client or a governing agency, and I have found that the better looking and easier to read output from MP5 makes my life and the reviewer's lives much better.
BTW, I started with Mathcad by demo'ing Mathcad 2.52 (the last DOS version) in the late (?) 1980s. I instantly liked it better than TKSolver, which I had been using for certain calcs. I then progressed through M4.0, M5.0, M6.0, M7.0, and M8.0. For a long time, I stayed with M8 because it did what I needed, and I was doing less pure engineering for a long while. I jumped to MP3.0 when M8 became too frustrating to run on modern computers. I had demo'ed MP1.0 and MP 2.0 and felt they weren't finished. MP 3.0 was the first version that met my modest requirements, even though I knew it was a pale shadow of M15.
