When MathCad Prime 6?

[gfraulini]

Hello everybody,
does someone have news about MathCad Prime 6?
Some timesheet?
MCP5 has introduced too few improvements so I think PTC intends release new version soon. Or not?...

Thanks
Bye

[LucMeekes · Accepted solution]

The history (over the past 10 years) shows that PTC promises more than it actually delivers.

I should not expect that, because Prime 4 to 5 is such a small step, a Prime 6 is due out soon.

And about PTC's intentions: one can only guess.

If you are a licensed Prime user you should be able to access more information on plans, timelines etc.

Success!

Luc

[gfraulini]

I didn't know that you can saw the product calendar... I see there isn't nothing scheduled for Mathcad...whereas for other products there is the calendarization.

E.g: for Creo it's planned the 6th release on the end of the winter.

[ValeryOchkov]

---

@gfraulini wrote:

… it's planned the 6th release on the end of the winter.

It is May in Moscow 

---

[DJF]

PTC's plan is to do 1 release a year, in time with the release of their other major products such as Creo and Windchill.  So, sometime in the spring.  

All I know about 6.0 is that it's supposed to add pulldown menus.  A nice feature, but not one that should take years to implement.

How they plan to catch up by doing one release a year is beyond me.  I don't think they realize that software is supposed to be a fast evolving field.  

[ValeryOchkov]

Есть такая русская поговорка - хорошего понемножку!

[skunks]

дорогой г-н профессор,
а за что платим???

[ValeryOchkov]

---

@skunks wrote:

дорогой г-н профессор,
а за что платим???

---

Подсчитано, что 50% и более наших платежей идет... псу под хвост - for nothing.

[Raiko]

exactly!

[Raiko]

Cynically, the question is pointless. It doesn't matter when MC prime 6 will be rolled out since I do not expect Prime to exceed Mathcad 15s capabilities any time soon. Judging from their past record certainly not before prime 10.

Raiko

[MikeArmstrong]

---

@Raiko wrote:

Cynically, the question is pointless. It doesn't matter when MC prime 6 will be rolled out since I do not expect Prime to exceed Mathcad 15s capabilities any time soon. Judging from their past record certainly not before prime 10.

Raiko

---

Prime 10 - I take it you are being optimistic? 🙂

Mike

[Raiko]

[VladimirN]

According to the PTC's product calendar, there are no exact dates for this release yet.

[Konrad_A]

Hi Vladimir,

This only shows that Prime 6 is not even being planned. So far there is 5.0.0.0, then there will be 5.0.0.1, then 5.0.0.2, then 5.0.0.3 and it may take forever this way. I don't know how long are you planning to live, but chances are that you will never see 6.0.0.0. Mind you, SMath is still at 0.99.something-something 🙂

Konrad

[LucMeekes]

Given the track record of PTC, chances are higher that they will bring out 6.0.0.0 as next release, being a small change with respect to 5.0.0.0, than that they will bring out 5.0.0.1.

Luc

[Konrad_A]

Hi Luc,

Pro/Engineer Creo Parametric moved from 5.0.0.0 to 5.0.1.0 and then 5.0.2.0. The last number seems to be 0 for all PTC products. The second number can go pretty high, I see 2206 for something I don't even know what it is. Perhaps a build number. Then there is a sequential number, what used to be datecode, then the major version number. This is all to confuse the enemy.

[Raiko]

This proves my point: it is not worth waiting for prime 6, since I do not expect it to be at par with Mathcad 15 any time soon. Even less so when PTC isn't even planning for it.

Raiko

[Konrad_A]

Raiko, my suggestion: don't wait for a specific version number (they tend to change version numbering on a random basis). Try waiting for a specific functionality implemented in the software. Not that it makes any difference, though. Like positive zero vs negative zero.

[Raiko]

Right you are Konrad.

Perhaps, that's the reason why my initial response was rather cynical. So, let's wait and see when controls, proper graphing and the rest of Mathcad 15 functionality returns.

Raiko

[Konrad_A]

Hi Raiko,

Maybe my point of view is very specific, because I'm just a simple design engineer in area of pressure vessels (I follow design codes, do some logic to assess FEA results, make a thick and nice-looking documents with a lot of simplistic calculations), but I just realised there's been 9 years since the first release of Prime. For the 9 years, the development of Mathcad has been practically stopped (as far as I'm concerned with my limited needs), while Prime is still being useless with ZERO new functionality towards engineering documents, out of which the most obvious would be an automatic table of contents. This situation is called a disaster, when starting from a leading product they degraded it to something worse than what you get for free. I find myself stuck with Mathcad only because I failed to predict this disaster- just imagine how frustrating this can be.

No, I don't really care when a 6.0 comes out. Here's a new year's resolution: I start migrating towards a different concept of making design calculations. Scilab, perhaps.

[skunks]

"...an automatic table of contents...", yes, I miss that,

but prime 3.1 is OK for my work

[Konrad_A]

Skunks, you don't need Prime to do it. You could do exactly the same document in MC15. Wasted 9 years, nothing else.

[Fred_Kohlhepp]

Beautiful

A classic example of making a silk purse from a sow's ear.

[Konrad_A]

Fred, that's the essence of engineering: you know it will work, it will not break because that's the way everybody makes it. But you have to demonstrate it in a nice and presentable way. It needs to be clear and self-explanatory, because you don't know what kind of people will read the document: an inspector, etc. There will be simple idiots among the reviewers, and you better make it clear, and answer all possible questions which can be asked. No matter how silly it sounds, this is why engineers need Mathcad: its primarily a tool for visual communication of simple concepts. 

That's why Prime has no value for engineering without controls, scripted objects, and other flashy gimmicks.

Of course, I don't mind having a powerful computer algebra system in the box 🙂

[Fred_Kohlhepp]

---

@Konrad_A wrote:

Fred, that's the essence of engineering: you know it will work, it will not break because that's the way everybody makes it. But you have to demonstrate it in a nice and presentable way.

---

I agree. And the example is an excellent specimen of a short engineering document.  But there's a lot on those pages that aren't Mathcad!  It would be interesting to know how many different programs contributed to those nine pages.

The ability to generate a table of contents was noted missing from Mathcad (not just Prime.)  There are a few more features available in Word that would be useful:

• Outlining, with different levels and automatic styles. (Possible manually in Mathcad with a lot of effort.)
• Auto numbering figures, tables, and sections.  (You can put numbers to titles, but insert one figure eight pages back and try to keep track of all the changes. . .)
• Auto numbering foot notes and references.

The list could be extended but my point is that word processor programs are better suited for larger documents and there would have to be a major upgrade to Mathcad before it even came close.  A better more reasonable hope would be the ability to copy Prime and paste it as an image, when last I checked copying a portion of a Prime page would not paste into another document--I had to use the snipping tool.  (I've tried inserting Mathcad into a Word file as an active document with mixed poor results.)

We'd be better off if Microsoft bought Mathcad and merged it into Word.

[Konrad_A]

Hi Fred,

You may want to have a look at this: http://comppad.sourceforge.net/

Anyway, I'm leaning towards making a script (with a GUI) which would generate the final document (the Scilab approach), rather than making a live document (the Mathcad approach) due to inherent limitations of the latter philosophy (no behind-the-scenes operations). It's easier to make your first steps in Mathcad, but then it leads you where it wants, not where you want to go 🙂

[Hum]

What are your impressions of comppad? Have you tried it yet? I'm a re-entry engineering student in my 30's just surveying the various software offerings. I usually use MATLAB and Mathcad Prime and just copy paste into my documents. 

Thank you for your time... 

[Raiko]

Hello Hum,

bluntly said: I'm not impressed. I'm using MathCad precisely because it is written in natural mathematical notation and not some code as in Excel or Matlab. easily understood by anyone who is not Mathcad savy.

Raiko

[Konrad_A]

Hi Hum,

No, I haven't used comppad- I think the project has been abandoned for 5 years now. I only wanted to show an example of a full-blown text processor which can (kind of) do some basic math as well. Out of the two (excellent text processor, poor math software vs poor text processor, excellent math software) I still prefer the latter, but good to know that there is choice.

[GrumpyOldTom]

You know what's sad?  I hate Word with the fury of a thousand hells, and I'm about ready to agree with you!

ETA:  that was in response to Fred K. back a couple of pages when he said Micro$oft should buy Mathcad and integrate it into <cough gag choke> "Word", a program that purports to be a word processor.