Scrap Prime 4 and give us Mathcad 16

[MarkBuckton]

The only thing that people seem to like about Mathcad Prime is its better unit handling. If my assertion is true and it is also true that Prime and MC15 are still using the Mathcad 12 kernel why not just incorporate the better unit handling in Mathcad 15? What other benefits does Prime have over MC15? If PTC. believes a MS ribbon interface is cool that's fine and they are at liberty to have ribbon version which they can use internally if that keeps them happy. So here is my solution for PTC. Get 2 good programmers for 2 months. One programmer works on incorporating the new unit handling into MC15 and the other works on incorporating the new numerical solvers. Allow a month for quality assurance and ship Mathcad 16 on August 1 2014. Every Mathcad user is happy PTC is happy also because it can continue to play with its toy version of Mathcad Prime internally and let the users concentrate on what should be in the Mathcad 17. Afterall without us there is no Mathcad, yet PTC never asks its users what they want in the program. Are PTC software builders or demolishes users have the right to decide who they are employing, we pay their wages, after all we are PTC clients but I think they have forgotten that. It's about time they put away their toys and grow up.

I Hope others feel the same.

regards Mark

[ValeryOchkov]

1. See please http://communities.ptc.com/polls/1141 and others my polls about Mathcad, Prime and... SMath. My friend Anrdey Ivashov can save Mathcad or can kill it

2. I think Mathcad developers have money not ( only) from Mathcad users but from Creo users and it is one root of the problem or Mathcad

3. About ribbon. New (young) Mathcad users think that programs without ribbon are programs from... XX centure. Thay are ready pay only for programs of XXI one.

[MarkBuckton]

This is a very sad situation. It shows that PTC are a completely arrogant corporation, don't talk to or respect their end users needs. PTC think they know better than them. I do not put myself in the class of yourself or many other users on this forum but PTC somehow has to humble itself and realise that there are more Doctors and Professors using Mathcad who are active on the forum than one would find in most universities. Their users are people doing important research and solving real world problems for their communities and elsewhere by using Mathcad software. These users need to be able to do those things efficiently and not find that PTC cannot leave well enough alone and have broken the very tool that they rely on. As I have said before the only thing that Mathcad 15 really needed is better unit handling. In my view the second most important thing is the ability of the software to generate a proffessional report or journal paper. If I where PTC I would have left Mathcad alone and concentrated on another product that could reliably take Mathcad output so that it could be easily formatted into a scientific paper. They could have sold this as an addon to Mathcad thereby increasing their revenue. They are quickly loosing that opportunity as Wolfram's computable document (CDF) format becomes dominate in the market.

[RichardJ]

As I have said before the only thing that Mathcad 15 really needed is better unit handling.

No, it needed a lot more than that. Multidimensional arrays, better graphing, basic drawing tools, faster computation, and many other additional features that we have been requesting for more than a decade. Instead we got slower computation, pitiful graphing, a UI that makes working painful, and a slew of missing features that we were using and now can't.

[MikeArmstrong]

Richard Jackson wrote:

As I have said before the only thing that Mathcad 15 really needed is better unit handling.

No, it needed a lot more than that. Multidimensional arrays, better graphing, basic drawing tools, faster computation, and many other additional features that we have been requesting for more than a decade. Instead we got slower computation, pitiful graphing, a UI that makes working painful, and a slew of missing features that we were using and now can't.

I have to agree with Richard, but better unit handling would have been a great addition to Mathcad 15.

[Raiko]

...It shows that PTC are a completely arrogant corporation, don't talk to or respect their end users needs. PTC think they know better than them...

Hello Mark,

I don't think that PTC is arrogant, but appart from that I second your thoughts.

However, I can't help thinking that there is a plan to it. PTC seems to put inordinate effort into Creo integration of Mathcad elements so maybe they want us using MC solely for that. Probably the reason for MC Prime's meagre document editing features is that they'd like users to adopt Arbortext instead. So it might be a strategy and not ignorance.

This is just hunch; no conspiracy theory herein.

Raiko

[MikeArmstrong]

Good point Raiko.

I would like to know how many people actually use Creo and Mathcad in tandem?

[Raiko]

Mike,

none in our department but that might be the result of of engineers disliking a dynamic document. Most I know prefer to start construction with a given set of data and not with the output of an algorythm they haven't written themselves. PTC however, never misses to point out the integration features of MC and Creo.

So far I found the effort necessary to integrate MC into ProE or Creo too high. Our engineering department is anyhow splitted into two factions of MC and ML users and since MC prime doesn't deliver on its promisses I'm seriously thinking about switching to Matlab.

Raiko

[MikeArmstrong]

So far I found the effort necessary to integrate MC into ProE or Creo too high. Our engineering department is anyhow splitted into two factions of MC and ML users and since MC prime doesn't deliver on its promisses I'm seriously thinking about switching to Matlab.

Raiko

That is such a shame and should send out a clear resounding message to PTC.

They are going to lose a wealth of experienced users, which in time, could be damaging.

[Raiko]

Yes, it's a pity. MC gave me a "feel" of (and for) mathematics which I will be missing.

[MikeArmstrong]

Hopefully Prime 4.0 will be a massive improvement.

[AndyWesterman]

PTC aren't considering the needs or wants of its user base, the 'upgrade' to prime severly limits the usefulness of their product.

I will keep using MC15 (& quite happily), but I can't justify the change for all the currently well known reasons!

One conclusion is that the Accountants are in charge of the building...

So lets put it in terms that will ring their bell.

Because Prime is, to me, a downgrade, I cannot recommend that we need to pay any maintenence fees.

What we have works! pay lots more money (every year) & get something that doesn't work as well - Hmmm: No brainer..

Based on the number of licenses & years out of maintenence I would estimate that PTC is already down by $10k for just our small office.

When (If) mathcad prime is improved enough to warrant the change-over the back maintenence will be excessive & purchase of new licenses will be the most cost effective strategy to upgrade(so this is revenue that is lost forever).

Multiply this by the (increasing) number of companies that are probably viewing the situation in a similar manner & the cost to PTC must be immense.

NB: this is the ONLY commercial software product that we view in this way . All of the other products that I & my colleagues use (year on year) add value to the software , there is advantage to paying the maintenence so therefore - WE DO!!

I don't expect that anyone from PTC will read this or act on it , but ... rant over.

[MikeArmstrong]

Well done for providing the information.

I hope someone from PTC is reading this.

NB: this is the ONLYcommercial software product that we view in this way . All of the other products that I & my colleagues use (year on year) add value to the software , there is advantage to paying the maintenence so therefore - WE DO!!

That comment has just made me think: I have recently returned to using Solidworks after several years away and the improvement is unimaginable. Imagine coming back to use Mathcad, say from Mathcad 11 and picking up Prime!!!

[RichardJ]

They promote the Mathcad / Creo integration because they want Creo users to adopt Prime. After all, nobody else is

As for the lack of document editing features, and everything else, they are just resource limited. They are seriously understaffed to get the job done in a reasonable time frame, and I see that as a problem that stems from the top.

[Werner_E]

As for the lack of document editing features, and everything else, they are just resource limited. They are seriously understaffed to get the job done in a reasonable time frame, and I see that as a problem that stems from the top.

As Mathcad users we often get the impression that the permanent neglection of our interests and the stepmotherly treatment of maintanance and development of Mathcad/Prime was because PTC doen't see it as one of its prime (pun intended) products. But by looking at the ongoing discussion here http://communities.ptc.com/message/242934#242934 it doesn't seem to be a Mathcad/Prime specific problem.

[Raiko]

Well spotted Werner!

Judging from experience, we're using Creo and Windchill as well, this seems to be rather a pattern than a fluke. PTC probably has a poor vision of what customers want however, there are strategic constraints which us plain engineers shouldn't neither dare to comprehend nor question 😉

Raiko

[Werner_E]

Mathcad came to age and I absolutely do see the need to give Mathcad a new code base to make it better maintainable and fit for modern operating system. Combining that with a face lift is legitimate and maybe necessary to address new users (personally I could easily do without). And sure its legitimate and quite natural for PTC to head for better integration of Mathcad in its main product, Creo (maybe the main reason Mathcad was taken over).

But its the way how PTC has done that, making few things better and most things worse (visability, speed of operation, convenience of handling,..., not to speak of the many missing features), which is incomprehensible and inexcusable. Its still not clear what exactly the objective of the program development will be and why "progress" is made that slowly. I guess most of us remember the roadmap where Prime 3 would be the version which inludes ALL of Mathcad 15 and more. And while its is not understandable why a company will officially and planned start the successor of a product with versions of reduced scope of functions, I have yet to meet someone who believes that Prime 4 or Prime 5 will the the version able to live up with good old (and its really old) Mathcad in all its facettes. And looking at the competitors who didn't sleep the last years it wouldn't be enough to simply come to the level of MC15, some major improvements would be necessary, too.

Mathcad has quite some unique selling points and no serious professional competitor in those areas which makes it hard for long term customers to turn their back. But I think the time has come now where existing customers have lost any confidence in PTC to bring the project to a good end in a reasonable time and are considering exit strategies. Once they have found an alternative they probably will never come back and its questionable if new customers will compensate for that.

[SylvainFlamant]

I'll be waiting for Prime 4, hoping that is a superset of mathcad 15, and not a subset... Meanwhile all the "Prime" versions are useless to me.

All features from Mathcad 15 should be able to run in Prime 5, and a file converter should be able to read files created under mathcad 15 and convert them to a file readable by Prime 5, with all the features...

Also , Mathcad Prime should run at same speed as Mathcad 15 ( I have some large simulations running several hours, and I don't want the durations to increase)

[RichardJ]

I'll be waiting for Prime 4, hoping that is a superset of mathcad 15, and not a subset... Meanwhile all the "Prime" versions are useless to me.

And I am hoping to win the lottery, even though I haven't bought any tickets

[Werner_E]

Richard Jackson wrote:

I'll be waiting for Prime 4, hoping that is a superset of mathcad 15, and not a subset... Meanwhile all the "Prime" versions are useless to me.

And I am hoping to win the lottery, even though I haven't bought any tickets

That comparison isn't fair - your winning at the lottery having a much higher probability.

[MikeArmstrong]

Werner Exinger wrote:

Richard Jackson wrote:

I'll be waiting for Prime 4, hoping that is a superset of mathcad 15, and not a subset... Meanwhile all the "Prime" versions are useless to me.

And I am hoping to win the lottery, even though I haven't bought any tickets

That comparison isn't fair - your winning at the lottery having a much higher probability.

Agree - I did win the lottery, but unfortunately not the jackpot

[Werner_E]

Mike Armstrong wrote:

Werner Exinger wrote:

Richard Jackson wrote:

I'll be waiting for Prime 4, hoping that is a superset of mathcad 15, and not a subset... Meanwhile all the "Prime" versions are useless to me.

And I am hoping to win the lottery, even though I haven't bought any tickets

That comparison isn't fair - your winning at the lottery having a much higher probability.

Agree - I did win the lottery, but unfortunately not the jackpot

Wow! Without having bought any tickets, as conditioned by Richard??

[MikeArmstrong]

Wow! Without having bought any tickets, as conditioned by Richard??

Hahahahahah - As part of a syndicate

[MikeArmstrong]

Superb point Werner,

But I think the time has come now where existing customers have lost any confidence in PTC to bring the project to a good end in a reasonable time and are considering exit strategies. Once they have found an alternative they probably will never come back and its questionable if new customers will compensate for that.

I would have loved to hear the opinion of some of the 'experts' collabs from the old forum who no longer come here.

[tietjee]

Prime 1,2, and 3 has not been an improvement over MathCAD 15. I have been paying maintenance fees hoping that Prime 3 would be at least as good as MathCAD 15. Some of the basic engineering tools are still not available. My maintenance is due at the end of June. What new features will be available in Prime 4 and the release date? The release dates keep getting pushed back and I could pay for maintenance twice with no upgrade. I am activily looking for a replacement program and will not come back to Prime.

[RichardJ]

Get 2 good programmers for 2 months. One programmer works on incorporating the new unit handling into MC15

It is certainly not that simple. The request for mixed units in arrays goes waaaay back, and the reason it didn't get done back in the Mathsoft days was because it couldn't be done without a major rewrite. Sure, they did such a rewrite with version 12, but that's when they implemented static unit checking, which broke the possibility completely. To get this implemented in MC15 would require a major rewrite again ti re-implement dynamic unit chacking, which is what they did for Prime.

[MikeArmstrong]

To get this implemented in MC15 would require a major rewrite again ti re-implement dynamic unit chacking, which is what they did for Prime.

Would a re-write as you mentioned have been achieved in a much shorter time than re-writing the whole UI as they have with Prime?

[syaacoby]

SORRY PTC !

In any case PRIME is worth nothing without PERFECT CONVERTER of old files !!!!!!!!!!!

I WILL NEVER USE PRIME WITHOUT A REAL CONVERTER !!!!!!!

How can PTC be so insensitive to the wishes of its customers ????

[Werner_E]

In any case PRIME is worth nothing without PERFECT CONVERTER of old files !!!!!!!!!!!

I WILL NEVER USE PRIME WITHOUT A REAL CONVERTER !!!!!!!

How can you expect a perfect converter given that Prime is missing so many features of Mathcad 15?

And then - a converter shouldn't be necessary (at least not on the user side) as one would expect that Prime is simply able to read and write files in the older formats.

[RichardJ]

one would expect that Prime is simply able to read and write files in the older formats.

Actually, I know why it can't do that, but I was asked not to tell. It would be very difficult to do, and is therefore uinlikely to ever happen. What may happen is a converter that is standalone (basically MC15 with no UI), so a full copy of MC15 is no longer required. I guess with a standalone converter it could be made to look like Prime is reading the older format, but it would really still be MC15, with no UI, converting it in the background. Writing to MC15 format just isn't going to happen.