Mathcad Prime - Positive Comment (for a change)

[MikeArmstrong]

I have heard so many members complain about the lack of functions included in Prime 1.0, so just for a second I want to look at one of the positive's of the new product.

Dynamic unit checking

I only used Mathcad 11 for a very short period before my employer upgraded to Mathcad 14, where I understand, static unit checking was implemented. If possible I would like forum members who have experienced the change over to provide a few examples to clear things up and give an indication of what's to come.

Simple or complex examples welcome.

Mike

[MikeArmstrong]

Maybe someone from PTC would like to provide a few comparisons, as it directly promoting a benefit of their new product.

Mike

[RichardJ]

OK. Here's one. This is a perfectly valid reason to want to return different units from a function.

http://communities.ptc.com/message/127288#127288

Of course, the worksheets never made it over from the Collab, so I've attached the most important one. It works in MC11, and does not work in later versions. There is not even any realistic way to make to work (it could be made to work by using a scripted component to rewrite the XML of a region, but I don't classify that as "realistic").

[nas0k]

It appears to work when converted to Prime.

nas

[MikeArmstrong]

That's good news cheers for trying.

Mike

[MikeArmstrong]

OK. Here's one. This is a perfectly valid reason to want to return different units from a function.

Cheers for taking the time to find a function.

Unfortunately I can't use Prime at the moment to check if it works. Could you provide a screenshot or *.pdf of the function working?

Mike

[RichardJ]

Unfortunately I can't use Prime at the moment to check if it works. Could you provide a screenshot or *.pdf of the function working?

Why? Don't you believe me that it works?

[ptc-1656721]

Richard Jackson wrote:

... It works in MC11, and does not work in later versions. There is not even any realistic way to make to work (it could be made to work by using a scripted component to rewrite the XML of a region, but I don't classify that as "realistic").

Maybe so:

[RichardJ]

It hadn't ocurred to me to "filter" it through the symbolic processor

Although that does work in this case it's not always going to work though.

[ptc-1656721]

Richard Jackson wrote:

It hadn't ocurred to me to "filter" it through the symbolic processor

Although that does work in this case it's not always going to work though.

Yes, of course. But I have had in many cases to circumvent known (SUC) problem.

Another example, which I was placed on collab:

Vyacheslav.

[MikeArmstrong]

Very nice example.

Mike

[ptc-1656721]

Mike Armstrong wrote:

Very nice example.

Mike

Thanks, Mike.

Mike Armstrong wrote:

...The problem is that the second column can't be changed from base IS units , but still I would consider this a massive improvemnt from M15.

Another example (MC15):

Vyacheslav.

[ptc-1176891]

If/when my company converts to using PRIME, I'll probably return to writing short programs that return multiple values (ie moment, shear and distance) each with their own units. I do miss that ability from the MC11 days.

Preston

[MikeArmstrong]

If/when my company converts to using PRIME, I'll probably return to writing short programs that return multiple values (ie moment, shear and distance) each with their own units. I do miss that ability from the MC11 days.

That's a good example Preston. I assume you'll also like the new feature Prime has which allows multi unit tables.

Mike

[MikeArmstrong]

A good improvemnt in Prime shown below as Preston indicated.

The problem is that the second column can't be changed from base IS units , but still I would consider this a massive improvemnt from M15.

Mike

[MikeArmstrong]

Must add to this thread that dragging regions in Prime is much better than in previous versions of Mathcad, massive improvement.

Mike

[RichardJ]

I'm not sure what you mean. In MC11 programs can't return multiple values with different units. At least, I don't know to do it.

[nelsonjavier]

Hola soy un estudiante universitario de chile ,y quiero dar mi opinion sobre Mathcad prime 1.0 :

Mathcad Prime 1.0 es realmente una idea de software brillante ,permite a los ingenieros realizar los calculos de manera visual muy amigable.

claramente mathcad prime 1.0 va ha superar a excel ,debido a que permite entender los modelos de forma clara y rapida no asi en excel.

Pueden crear Videotutoriales en español para los muchos estudiante universitarios que estan inquietos por ocupar Mathcad Prime 1.0,

actualmente ocupo Mathematica 8 de wolfram Alpha ,pero mathcad prime 1.0 es una gran idea .

¿Existe algun manual en español para Mathcad prime 1.0 ?

Muchas Gracias por crear Mathcad Prime 1.0 es realmente genial.

[mzeftel]

Hola Nelson,

Si, es algun manual en español para Mathcad prime 1.0.

Mathcad Prime 1.0 comes in English, French, Spanish, Italian, Russian, Simplified Chinese, Traditional Chinese, Korean, and Japanese.

Mona

[MikeArmstrong]

nelson javier wrote:

Hola soy un estudiante universitario de chile ,y quiero dar mi opinion sobre Mathcad prime 1.0 :

Mathcad Prime 1.0 es realmente una idea de software brillante ,permite a los ingenieros realizar los calculos de manera visual muy amigable.

claramente mathcad prime 1.0 va ha superar a excel ,debido a que permite entender los modelos de forma clara y rapida no asi en excel.

Pueden crear Videotutoriales en español para los muchos estudiante universitarios que estan inquietos por ocupar Mathcad Prime 1.0,

actualmente ocupo Mathematica 8 de wolfram Alpha ,pero mathcad prime 1.0 es una gran idea .

¿Existe algun manual en español para Mathcad prime 1.0 ?

Muchas Gracias por crear Mathcad Prime 1.0 es realmente genial.

Any chance of a translation?

Mike

[mzeftel]

Here's the Google translate version of what Nelson wrote:

Hello I am a college student from Chile, and I want to give my opinion on prime Mathcad 1.0:

Prime Mathcad 1.0 is really a brilliant idea of ​​software allows engineers to perform calculations visually friendly.

mathcad prime clearly going to exceed 1.0 to excel, because it allows models to understand quickly and clearly not in excel.

They can create Videotutoriales in Spanish for many college students who are anxious to occupy Prime Mathcad 1.0,

currently occupy Wolfram Mathematica 8 Alpha, but prime mathcad 1.0 is a great idea.

Is there a manual in Spanish for prime Mathcad 1.0?

Thank you very much for creating Mathcad Prime 1.0 is really cool.

[MikeArmstrong]

Here's the Google translate version of what Nelson wrote:

Hello I am a college student from Chile, and I want to give my opinion on prime Mathcad 1.0:

Prime Mathcad 1.0 is really a brilliant idea of ​​software allows engineers to perform calculations visually friendly.

mathcad prime clearly going to exceed 1.0 to excel, because it allows models to understand quickly and clearly not in excel.

They can create Videotutoriales in Spanish for many college students who are anxious to occupy Prime Mathcad 1.0,

currently occupy Wolfram Mathematica 8 Alpha, but prime mathcad 1.0 is a great idea.

Is there a manual in Spanish for prime Mathcad 1.0?

Thank you very much for creating Mathcad Prime 1.0 is really cool.

Cheers Mona,

Some nice comments about Prime in there

Mike

[VladimirN]

Hello!

The Mathcad Prime 1.0 user interface and documentation are translated into Spanish.

Some manuals in Spanish (for Mathcad Prime 1.0) can be found on site PTC in section "Reference Documents": http://www.ptc.com/appserver/cs/doc/refdoc.jsp

P.S. Also you can find video examples on work with Mathcad Prime here: http://learningexchange.ptc.com/tutorials/by_product/product_id:4

[PhilipOakley]

I thought that this blog http://www.eetimes.com/discussion/programmer-s-toolbox/4216405/The-changing-face-of-Mathcad on The changing face of Mathcad by Jack Renshaw, was a pretty good summary of some of the history of why Mathcad is what it is, and has some praise for the efforts in creating Prime.

Philip

[MikeArmstrong]

Nice blog, but he's wrong about the quadratic formula part. It doesn't need to be wrote out as he indicated.

Mike

[PhilipOakley]

Mike Armstrong wrote:

Nice blog, but he's wrong about the quadratic formula part. It doesn't need to be wrote out as he indicated.

Mike

Not quite sure why you felt his point was 'wrong'. I thought it was a reasonable example of the benefit of seeing 'proper maths' expressions, though perhaps not that complex. For some it may feel even simple as many people are drilled at school to remember the quadratic solution formula, buit for a more complex expression it becomes more useful.

[MikeArmstrong]

I felt it was wrong because he states that the formula cannot be written as in the text book example and it can.

Mike