Is this the end of the line for Mathcad?

[jiCavers]

There seems to be a big problem for Mathcad users, now that Windows XP is disappearing into the past. Most of us have years of valuable Mathcad programs, and the only way to convert them to Prime is through a conversion utility in Mathcad 15 (instead of in Prime). But Mathcad 15 won't install easily on Windows 7 or 8 - from discussion on this site, it involves a lot of complicated and time-consuming work, with no guarantee of success.
* Inference 1: Do all your conversions now, while you still have a working version 15 on Windows XP or another older OS.

Unfortunately, I read that Prime 2.0 still lacks a large number of the features that made Mathcad 15 valuable, so your converted programs might not work in Prime.
* Inference 2: Your prior work will be useable only as long as you keep a working computer running older Windows. Clearly, that approach has a limited life.
* Inference 3: Even new work using Prime will be stunted, because it's not yet a platform for serious work.

Have I got this wrong? Is there a credible way forward, after all? Because an uncomfortable fourth inference might be that this is the end of the line for Mathcad.

[Werner_E]

M030 means maintainance release. The first release usually is labelled F000, them M005, M010, M020, ... You may see it as subversions (there is no 15.1, etc.)

Prime is PTC attempt to rewrite Mathcad from scratch giving it a new, modern codebase (while using most of the existing math internals) and a modern look and feel (ribbons !?). IMHO this goal was not achieved. From the very beginning it was announced that not all features would be implemented until version Prime 3. Now P3 is out and it still doen't live up to MC15. As someone else has put it here "thats the result of repacing engineering by marketing". Prime is a very sad story in my opionion and you may get an impression by looking at the various postings in this forum dealing with Prime vs. Mathcad.

As you worked with MC14 you know what Mathcad could (should?) look like. You you may give Prime a try as you can download a 30-day avaluation copy for free and after that trial period Prime turns into a crippled but working "express" version which refuses to to programs, solve blocks, symbolic maths, etc. but can be used for more basic neeeds. Prime can coexist with older (MC15 and below) versions but cannot read their format. To be able to convert a legacy file you must have a full installation of the latest MC15 on your machine.

[ptc-2283641]

Thanks for the info. I will install MC15 and disregard installing the Prime(s).

[Fred_Kohlhepp]

My advice?

Install them both. Sooner or later Prime will be all there is; and your choice will be Prime, or MatLab, or Maple, or Smath, or . . .

[Werner_E]

Ken Lamury wrote:

Thanks for the info. I will install MC15 and disregard installing the Prime(s).

Don't take my word for it - try it yourself. Just because I am not happy with Prime doesn't necessarily mean that it doesn't fit your needs. And as Fred pointed out, MC15 has an expiry date .

[DenisJaunin]

Hello Werner,
According to information from PTC:
Mathcad 15.0 will be covered by the standard support at least until the release of Mathcad Prime 5.0.
Mathcad 15.0 will be covered by the extended support for a period of two years after the period of standard support.
We still have a few years.
Cordially.
Denis.

[TerryRickard]

Prime is afflicted by what I call the "Microsoft disease", which involves periodically upending a user community by changing the entire look and feel of a familiar product, just for the sake of change. It would be fine if PTC devoted their programmers' time to updating the core Mathcad code to keep it current with future changes in operating systems while preserving the familiar user environment. But NO, they want to force us into a new, less appealing user interface, while neglecting the most important of all considerations--maintaining the stability and capabilities of Mathcad. What these boneheads need to understand is that Mathcad users are overwhelmingly interested in it as a computational tool, not as a desktop publishing environment or a web developers' wet dream.

[DenisJaunin]

Hello, Terry,

I use MathCad since version 2 DOS.

I had all the updates so far and many things have been integrated into Mathad and gone.

Each time with a new adaptation to the latest version of Windows.

Cordially.

Denis.

[ptc-2283641]

Terry Rickard's statements are correct. It does seem that marketing has taken over. It now seems that it may take a new generation of users to trust PTC's software. This reminds me of McAfee's company. As an intermediate user, I'm scared to purchase MC15, or Mathcad Prime in any version.

[BertBeirinckx]

I sometimes wonder if PTC is actually reading the stuff on this forum.

[MikeArmstrong]

What are you actually refering to Bert? I know they do read this forum.

[BertBeirinckx]

Mike Armstrong wrote:

What are you actually refering to Bert? I know they do read this forum.

What I cannot understand is why PTC is pushing through Prime when it is obvious that it is still way inferior to Mathcad 15. They got a lot of feedback from their Beta-testers (I was one of them), and a lot of feedback on this forum. Yet they seem to fail to get Prime up to level with Mathcad 15.

I first heard of PTC's plans to rebuild Mathcad from scratch a few weeks after they purchased Mathsoft, and I was very positive about it because I had hoped performance would be improved considerably. So many years later, I can only observe that many users, most of them having a very long track record with Mathcad, have severe issues with Prime. And PTC seems to be ignorant to those remarks.

I think Terry is right on the mark with his statement that PTC "need to understand that Mathcad users are overwhelmingly interested in it as a computational tool, not as a desktop publishing environment or a web developers' wet dream." This was exactly my concern when I first saw the new interface prior to the beta release of Prime 1.0. All looks and eye candy, but no or too little focus on computational power and features. This observation was confirmed over the next releases...

I've given Prime 3.0 a serious chance trying to convert some important sheets. After having performance problems, I've even rebuilt those sheets from scratch. My problems have nothing to do with the changed interface, I now am proficient using both interfaces, but in the end, I still have to stick with Mathcad 15 simply because of performance.

I do hope PTC will still support 15 at least until the release of Prime 5.0. Otherwise, after a track record of +18 years, I have no other choice than to move away and explore other systems.

That would be very disappointing as I really have a lot to owe to Mathcad. I've done things with it that cannot be done with anything else.

I really hope that PTC can get their act together and come up with a decent successor to Mathcad 15. Someone stated that the current Prime releases should be relabeled to Prime 0.1, 0.2 and 0.3. I totally second that.

[MikeArmstrong]

Nicely put Bert.

I think PTC had no choice but to release Prime when they did for two reasons:

1. Gain a return on the investment costs developing Prime.
2. Catch new users at an early stage before they got exposed to other software.

What I cannot understand is why PTC is pushing through Prime when it is obvious that it is still way inferior to Mathcad 15. They got a lot of feedback from their Beta-testers (I was one of them), and a lot of feedback on this forum. Yet they seem to fail to get Prime up to level with Mathcad 15.

They have no choice no but to push on. I have no idea how long it takes to fully re-write the UI, but believe PTC might have underestimated it.

I really hope that PTC can get their act together and come up with a decent successor to Mathcad 15. Someone stated that the current Prime releases should be relabeled to Prime 0.1, 0.2 and 0.3. I totally second that.

I sort of agree with this also. I think the level Prime 4.0 will at should have been the first release. Having said that, there are a few improvements and I believe PTC WILL get there in the end. From what I have heard they have improved Creo from ProEng, which gives me confidence.

[BertBeirinckx]

Well ProE / Creo always has been a PTC product. I've been using that since r19. Creo 2.0 is indeed an improvement even with the GUI as it is right now. I had more issues with the first release of Wildfire when they changed the controls.

It's a bit funny. 15 years ago I used Mathcad from Mathsoft, ME10 from CoCreate and ProE from PTC and really loved using the three. Now these three products are owned by PTC and I sure see many opportunities if PTC can get Mathcad to a decent level.

If they can succeed in integrating Mathcad into Creo for the definition of relations, parameters or even geometry (that would be really cool), there will be some very interesting designs coming out of my laptop.

[MikeArmstrong]

We live in hope

[MikeArmstrong]

If you purchase Prime you get a free copy of Mathcad 15 anyway.

[MikeArmstrong]

A little harsh Terry. Unfortunately this is the way most programs are heading and if Mathcad wouldn't have adapted it might have been left behind.

Prime will get there in the end, there is no doubt about that.

[Fred_Kohlhepp]

Yes, and Prime 3 was going to have all features of 15!

[Stillc]

It ought to be the end for Prime 3. It is a joke compared to MC 15!

[Werner_E]

Stillman Chase wrote:

It ought to be the end for Prime 3. It is a joke compared to MC 15!

If, then a bad joke and I can't laugh about it.

[MikeArmstrong]

Prime 4.0 isn't that far away. Please bear with it.

[RichardJ]

So that we can then wait for Prime 5.0? I will be very surprised if Prime 4.0 has everything that's currently missing.

[MikeArmstrong]

Hopefully you are wrong, but I tend to agree. Hopefully PTC have listened to the gripes and took it onboard.

[Werner_E]

Mike Armstrong wrote:

Hopefully you are wrong, but I tend to agree. Hopefully PTC have listened to the gripes and took it onboard.

I admire your optimism, though I wonder what it is based on other than a "we have no other choice than to hope the best". Why do you think that PTC is just now starting to listening to their customers. They haven't done in the past (maybe they have but haven't reacted accordingly) and I see no signs of change of attitude.

[MikeArmstrong]

I admire your optimism, though I wonder what it is based on other than a "we have no other choice than to hope the best". Why do you think that PTC is just now starting to listening to their customers. They haven't done in the past (maybe they have but haven't reacted accordingly) and I see no signs of change of attitude.

Because if they do not they are doomed to fail.

'Customer is always right' and all that.....

[Werner_E]

Because if they do not they are doomed to fail.

And PTC bought Mathcad in ... 2006/2007? That is a long time they had have to listen, why didn't they?

'Customer is always right' and all that.....

The question is: "which customers?" Prime is quite obviously heading at a new breed of users, ignoring the current users.

[MikeArmstrong]

I have no idea. When they purchased Mathcad they obviously thought the UI needed updating and underestimated how much work was involved.

Maybe it is blind optimism because I want Mathcad to succeed.

[Werner_E]

Mike Armstrong wrote:

I have no idea. When they purchased Mathcad they obviously thought the UI needed updating and underestimated how much work was involved.

I agree, and its not the UI alone. Mathcad was coming in the age and a new codebase sure was an urgent need. And they sure had underestimated the task. In the first phase after the acquistion when we didn't hear much from PTC and their plans with Mathcad, ther was rumour that this will be the end of Mathcad as a standalone product and that is was bought just to intgrate it in Pro-E. I think that even PTC wasn't too sure about what to do with Mathcad.

Maybe it is blind optimism because I want Mathcad to succeed.

Bummer! Thought you would have some insider information about that all will be good at the end 😉

[MikeArmstrong]

Werner Exinger wrote:

Maybe it is blind optimism because I want Mathcad to succeed.

Bummer! Thought you would have some insider information about that all will be good at the end 😉

Hahaha - I'm afraid not

[RichardJ]

The fact that three peoeple are MIA does indicate that someone in management is listening. Whether or not they can actually make anything happen remains to be seen.

[Werner_E]

Richard Jackson wrote:

The fact that three peoeple are MIA

MIA ... Missing In Action ??