wbralick@afit-ab.arpa (William A. Bralick) (01/31/89)
Is a version of Mathematica currently produced or being planned
for the Amiga? I think that the Amiga would be an exceptional
platform for Mathematica, and (I think) it would be a fairly
direct port.
Regards,
--
Will Bralick : wbralick@afit-ab.arpa | If we desire to defeat the enemy,
Air Force Institute of Technology, | we must proportion our efforts to
| his powers of resistance.
with disclaimer; use disclaimer; | - Carl von Clauswitzw-colinp@microsoft.UUCP (Colin Plumb) (02/01/89)
I'm not sure if you're aware, but there is another symbolic math package, Maple, already running on the Amiga. While it's missing all the great graphics, it's a more mature system, and runs in less memory. It is also written at the University I attend, but that has absolutely nothing to do with it... -- -Colin (uunet!microsoft!w-colinp) "Don't listen to me. I never do."
murphy@pur-phy (William J. Murphy) (02/01/89)
In article <876@afit-ab.arpa> wbralick@blackbird.afit.af.mil (William A. Bralick) writes: >Is a version of Mathematica currently produced or being planned ^^^^^^^^^^^ >for the Amiga? I think that the Amiga would be an exceptional >Will Bralick : wbralick@afit-ab.arpa | If we desire to defeat the enemy, Last fall, Mathematica came to purdue to show their wares right after the NeXT demonstration. When asked that very question, "Will Mathematica be available on the Amiga?" The answer was YES. The Kernal for M is the same for all machines (If I remember correctly), but the graphical/user interface is what will take the time to port. I would expect that M will not run too well without adding another couple of Meg to the Amy 2000 as well as a harddrive. In fact, I would think that the A2500 will be a pretty good base for Mathematica. Oh, The person who presented to Purdue, was Nancy Blachman (Blackman?), I don't have her e-mail address in front of me, but will find it later so you can post your questions directly to her. Bill Murphy murphy@newton.physics.purdue.edu
sam20285@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (02/02/89)
The news from sources inside Wolfram Research Inc. claim that an Amiga port of Mathematica is planned. Whether the port is being done currently or slated for the future is unknown to me. Anyone else know? Steve March uiucmath.math.uiuc.edu
farhi@athena.mit.edu (Bill Hoston) (02/03/89)
Stephen Wolfram made a few visits to the Boston area late last year and I got the opportunity to speak with him. He said that there is work being done on an Amiga port of Mathematica (he said it wasn't too hard since the kernel was the same on all systems). He complimented the computer and said that it was a nice platform for the program. At the time he said that he hoped to have the program running on a very basic system (he even mentioned the possibility of a rom card for A500's). He gave me the impression (it was more than an impression) that the biggest stumbling block for the project was Commodore. Anyway, I just wanted to say that I don't think the program will call for lots of extra memory or a hard drive (take my word for what it is worth). Bill Hoston farhi@athena.mit.edu
iphwk%MTSUNIX1.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Bill Kinnersley) (02/03/89)
[Bill Murphy <murphy@newton.physics.purdue.edu> said: : : Last fall, Mathematica came to purdue to show their wares right after the : NeXT demonstration. When asked that very question, "Will Mathematica be : available on the Amiga?" The answer was YES. : : Oh, The person who presented to Purdue, was Nancy Blachman (Blackman?), : I don't have her e-mail address in front of me, but will find it later This must be she: Blachman, Nancy (NRB) nb@WRI.COM Wolfram Research, Inc. P.O. Box 6059 Champaign, IL 61821 (217) 398-0700
bader+@andrew.cmu.edu (Miles Bader) (02/03/89)
farhi@athena.mit.edu (Bill Hoston) writes: > biggest stumbling block for the project was Commodore. Anyway, I > just wanted to say that I don't think the program will call for lots > of extra memory or a hard drive (take my word for what it is worth). From what I've heard of people's experience with mathematica on mac-ii's, 2 megabytes was a lower limit, and you could start doing real work with 4... [don't trust me either] -Miles
farhi@athena.mit.edu (Bill Hoston) (02/03/89)
In article <MXuEKhy00Uka02p11I@andrew.cmu.edu> bader+@andrew.cmu.edu (Miles Bader) writes: >farhi@athena.mit.edu (Bill Hoston) writes: >> biggest stumbling block for the project was Commodore. Anyway, I >> just wanted to say that I don't think the program will call for lots >> of extra memory or a hard drive (take my word for what it is worth). > >From what I've heard of people's experience with mathematica on >mac-ii's, 2 megabytes was a lower limit, and you could start doing >real work with 4... [don't trust me either] > >-Miles The main reason for the large memory requirements with the Mac version is the way memory is handled by the system. According to Wolfram it is the horrible.... Supposedly a version of Mathematica was released in December for I*M 386 machines that could run in < 700K. I got the impression that an Amiga version would fall between the two somehow. Once again, I know nothing and represent no one. Bill Hoston farhi@athena.mit.edu
shd609@uxf.cso.uiuc.edu (02/04/89)
Nancy Blachman's email address is nb@wri.com. I encourage every person who wants Mathematica ported to the Amiga to send her e-mail. simon@wri.com
iphwk%MTSUNIX1.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Bill Kinnersley) (02/07/89)
[In "Re: Amiga & Mathematica", Colin Plumb said:] : : I'm not sure if you're aware, but there is another symbolic math package, : Maple, already running on the Amiga. While it's missing all the great : graphics [of Mathematica], it's a more mature system, and runs in less memory. : : -Colin (uunet!microsoft!w-colinp) : "Don't listen to me. I never do." : My impression is that both Maple and Mathematica not only require a lot of memory, but also a lot of *money*. Does anyone know how much? -- --Bill Kinnersley Physics Department Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717 INTERNET: iphwk@terra.oscs.montana.edu BITNET: IPHWK@MTSUNIX1
paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) (02/07/89)
In article <8105@louie.udel.EDU> iphwk%MTSUNIX1.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Bill Kinnersley) writes:
->[In "Re: Amiga & Mathematica", Colin Plumb said:]
->:
->: I'm not sure if you're aware, but there is another symbolic math package,
->: Maple, already running on the Amiga. While it's missing all the great
->: graphics [of Mathematica], it's a more mature system, and runs in less memory.
->:
->: -Colin (uunet!microsoft!w-colinp)
->: "Don't listen to me. I never do."
->:
->My impression is that both Maple and Mathematica not only require a lot
->of memory, but also a lot of *money*. Does anyone know how much?
Maple requires 1Meg of RAM and 10Megs of hard disk space. The version for
the Amiga costs $395.
->--Bill Kinnersley
-> Physics Department Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717
-> INTERNET: iphwk@terra.oscs.montana.edu BITNET: IPHWK@MTSUNIX1
--
-+= SAM =+-
"the best things in life are free"
ARPA: paolucci@snll-arpagw.llnl.govkim@uts.amdahl.com (Kim DeVaughn) (02/09/89)
[ ... ] Since I am quite interested in seeing an application like Mathematica ported to the Amiga (and feel that the machine would make an excellent platform, especially with an 020/881, etc), I dashed off a note to Nancy Blachman a few days ago, WRT the Amiga port supposedly "in progress". Her reply was: > Kim, > > We do not currently have Mathematica available for the Amiga. > One reason why we are not sure that we will do the port is that > without virtual memory, Mathematica requires approximately 3 meg > of memory and not many Amiga users have this much. > > > Nancy Soooooo ... it does not appear that Mathematica is actually "on the way", as other postings have suggested, but it does sound like it hasn't been ruled out. Perhaps CBM could show some Marketing/Sales initiative, and discuss this with them ... and maybe even (gasp) share some of their market research, sales projections, etc. for 3+ Meg Amiga's. This could be a "Golden Opportunity" to get a foot in the door with the scientific/engineering/mathmatics community, who typically care a helluva lot more about getting the job done, than they do PClone compatibility (like the business types do). Could maybe somebody at CBM (CATS, DOGS, etc) pass this info along to the right people in Marketing/Etc. And I suppose it couldn't hurt for individual users to contact Nancy, with words of support/encouragement for the project. She can be reached at "nb@wri.com", or "uunet!wri!bluto!nb". /kim -- UUCP: kim@amdahl.amdahl.com or: {sun,decwrl,hplabs,pyramid,uunet,oliveb,ames}!amdahl!kim DDD: 408-746-8462 USPS: Amdahl Corp. M/S 249, 1250 E. Arques Av, Sunnyvale, CA 94086 BIX: kdevaughn GEnie: K.DEVAUGHN CIS: 76535,25
jmdavis@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Davis) (02/10/89)
In article <00VO0520TZ1010ep0M.@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>, kim@uts.amdahl.com (Kim DeVaughn) writes: > > > especially with an 020/881, etc), I dashed off a note to Nancy Blachman a few > days ago, WRT the Amiga port supposedly "in progress". > > Her reply was: > > > > Kim, > > without virtual memory, Mathematica requires approximately 3 meg > > of memory and not many Amiga users have this much. > > > > > What!?!?!? How much memory does it take to run in a Mac. The book I have seen on Mathematica indicates that it runs on Macintoshes, not only Mac II's. I can't believe there are that many more folks out there who have 3 MB on good ole Mac I's. Anyway, Even if it is 3 Megs on a Mac, I am curious if they have investigated the operating system on the amiga. Seems like they could save some memory by writing an intelligent port. While this memory savings may not be much, I expect there are many more 2.5 MB amiga owners than there are owners with more than 2.5 MB. And (I hope) the intelligence of the Amiga OS wrt Mac OS should make it possible to realize this 0.5 MB savings. Finally, the comment about Virtual Memory, well, wouldn't overlays be possible here? While some of the beauty of Mathematica is that you can do "piping" (actually stuff like graph(Fourier(dataset))) there ought to be some commands that are mutually exclusive. I would like to hear comments on this before I send Nancy my questions. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mike Davis ..!att!ihlpm!jmdavis char*p="char*p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
cmcmanis%pepper@Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) (02/11/89)
Curiously enough, no one seems to have pointed out that you can't buy
an Amiga 2500 with *less* than three megabytes. I say why not "target"
it at the A2500 buyer, someone ready to invest $4.5K into an Amiga won't
worry about 300 - 400 for a whizzy mathematics analysis program.
What about Macsyma? Anyone talk to Symbolics yet? They seem to have a
fairly decent package these days (orders of magnitude better than the
stuff at MIT-XX 7 or 8 years ago.)
Of course if you are someone who "wouldn't dream" of paying $300 for a
piece of software then, well, you might have a tough time imagining what
you could do with Mathematica.
--Chuck McManis
uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com
These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.healy@nrl-cmf.UUCP (Liam Healy) (02/12/89)
In article <3026@ihlpm.ATT.COM> jmdavis@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Davis) writes: >> >> Her reply was: >> > Kim, >> > without virtual memory, Mathematica requires approximately 3 meg >> > of memory and not many Amiga users have this much. >What!?!?!? How much memory does it take to run in a Mac. The book I >have seen on Mathematica indicates that it runs on Macintoshes, not >only Mac II's. I can't believe there are that many more folks out >there who have 3 MB on good ole Mac I's. > >Anyway, Even if it is 3 Megs on a Mac, I am curious if they have investigated >the operating system on the amiga. Seems like they could save some memory >by writing an intelligent port. I have used Mathematica extensively on a Mac II. Technically it will run in 2 MB, but is effectively useless. I would say the practical minimum is 4 MB. 8 MB is nice. I don't know what this implies for the Amiga, but even if it requires less than on the Mac, it will still require a lot (compared to the standard configuration). On the other hand, a few megabytes is no longer outlandish or even uncommon. >Finally, the comment about Virtual Memory, well, wouldn't overlays be >possible here? While some of the beauty of Mathematica is that you can The possibility occured to me too. I don't see why not. I would like to see Mathematica in a multi-tasking environment like the Amiga. Maybe with an AREXX port? >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Mike Davis ..!att!ihlpm!jmdavis Liam Healy Naval Research Laboratory healy@cmsun.nrl.navy.mil
duncan@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (Shan D Duncan) (02/12/89)
In article <170@nrl-cmf.UUCP> healy@cmsun.nrl.navy.mil (Liam Healy) writes: >In article <3026@ihlpm.ATT.COM> jmdavis@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Davis) writes: >>> >>> Her reply was: >>> > Kim, > >>> > without virtual memory, Mathematica requires approximately 3 meg >>> > of memory and not many Amiga users have this much. > >>What!?!?!? How much memory does it take to run in a Mac. The book I >>have seen on Mathematica indicates that it runs on Macintoshes, not >>only Mac II's. I can't believe there are that many more folks out >>there who have 3 MB on good ole Mac I's. >> This from Info World under the title: Wolfram Research ships Mathematica for 80386 Dos pc's. Program includes all the features in the Mac and upcoming Unix versions, except Notebook interface for interactive courseware (in Mac and NeXt). 32-bit program requires 1 megabyte of extended memory and takes advantage of virtual memory for calculations that require more than 1 mg, using the Par Lap's 386/VMM DOS extender. CGA,EGA,MCGA,VGA, Hercules, and IBM 8514 also supported. Basic program cost $695 version with 287 or 387 coprocessors cost $995 version with Weitek 1167 or 3167 numeric coprocessors $1295 Just reporting what I read: Standard disclaimers apply and trademark stuff for Unix, Mathematica Mac, NeXt, IBM, Par Lab, etc. etc. etc.
UH2@PSUVM.BITNET (Lee Sailer) (02/14/89)
In article <170@nrl-cmf.UUCP>, healy@nrl-cmf.UUCP (Liam Healy) says: > >I would like to see Mathematica in a multi-tasking environment like >the Amiga. Maybe with an AREXX port? > I read somewhere that Mathematica is carefully modulrized into a user interface and the actual kernel that does all the work. It should be easy to create a user interface that REXX could talk to. It may be able to talk to the kernel, directly.