jmitchel@king.drexel.edu (Jim Mitchell) (05/07/91)
I'd appreciate opinion on what the current favorite program is that does what Cricket Graph used to do. We're particularly interested in curve fitting as well as general graphing of data. It's my impression that something better is available, but don't know what. Obviously the less expensive the better.
macq@miguel.llnl.gov (Don MacQueen) (05/08/91)
In article <1991May7.110742.13400@mcs.drexel.edu>, jmitchel@king.drexel.edu (Jim Mitchell) writes: |> I'd appreciate opinion on what the current favorite program is that does |> what Cricket Graph used to do. We're particularly interested in curve |> fitting as well as general graphing of data. It's my impression that something |> better is available, but don't know what. Obviously the less expensive the better. -- The number and frequency of requests for graphing programs on this newsgroup is AMAZING... KaleidaGraph (which I've used) will do these things, $145 mail order. Also possibly Igor and DeltaGraph. -------------------- Don MacQueen macq@miguel.llnl.gov --------------------
barvian@ece.cmu.edu (Scott Barvian) (05/08/91)
I hope this (old, but still accurate) discussion of DeltaGraph helps out in
the "which graphing program is better" debate.
----------------------------------------
Check MacWorld 7/90 for a basic discussion. It convinced me to buy DeltaGraph.
I have basically been happy with it, but:
1) it's really a "color" Mac program- to use it on B&W screens (I use both)
you have to keep straight the difference between "colors", "grayscales"
and "fill patterns". Not tough but annoying at first.
2) The "formula evaluation" capabilities are limited. Suppose I have two
columns, of x data and y data. I plot them, and then I use their "curve
fitting" feature to get a least-squares-fit line formula. I can't directly
plot that line on my graph, but I can go back into the "spreadsheet" and
calculate it. And it's not even that easy, because all the spreadsheet
can do is process one operation at a time. That is, if the formula I have
is "y=3x+5", the "3x" and "+5" are two separate operations. And it's not
like Excel either, if I decide to look at "y=2.9x+5" I have to repeat the
whole process, I can't just change the coefficient and hit "recalculate".
For scientific/engineering use this is DG's biggest weakness. They do
offer an Excel macro which is supposed to "hot link" the 2 programs, but
I found that it doesn't always work.
Your mileage may vary. This article may not be reprinted without the
written consent of the Commissioner of Major League Baseball or his mom.
--
==== Scott Barvian ============ Department of Electrical/Computer Eng. ===
==== barvian@ece.cmu.edu ====== Carnegie Mellon Univ., Pittsburgh, PA ===hoepfner@heawk1.gsfc.nasa.gov (Patrick Hoepfner) (05/09/91)
jmitchel@king.drexel.edu (Jim Mitchell) writes: >I'd appreciate opinion on what the current favorite program is that does >what Cricket Graph used to do. We're particularly interested in curve >fitting as well as general graphing of data. It's my impression that >something better is available, but don't know what. Obviously the less >expensive the better. For scientific work we find that Igor and KaleidaGraph are very good. Igor stands for (Interactive Graphics Oriented Research tool) and as you might guess, its strong suit is scientific analysis of data and it has what one user described as an expert-friendly interface. This doesn't mean that it is not friendly, just that as you select items in the pull down menus, it builds up commands in a window. And clicking on a button executes the command and adds it to a list of commands that you can re-use like a macro. (There is an Igor demo copy available from an anonymous FTP site.) KaleidaGraph is more Mac like in it's commanding. Both of these programs will allow you to do some page layout kind of things. For example, you can place several graphs or tables on the same page or place one graph or table inside another. It makes a nice effect when you place a table of the data inside the graph. One of our graphs found its way to the front page of the New York Times's Science section. If that isn't professional, then I don't know what is! Hope this helps. -- Pat -- +--------------------------+---------------------------------------+ / Patrick Hoepfner | NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center \ / America Online: PatrickH9 | Internet: hoepfner@heasfs.gsfc.nasa.gov \ +-----------------------------+------------------------------------------+
sjhg9320@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott Jerome Howard) (05/10/91)
Kaleidagraph and Igor are very good for Scientific and Engineering purposes, but DeltaGraph produces much better output on Postscipt devices and is one heck of a lot easier to learn and has much better documentation and technical support. Deltagraph also lets you directly import CricketGraph, Excel, PICT2, and EPSF files.
hpmoore@violet.berkeley.edu (;;;;LH65) (05/10/91)
In article <1991May9.190850.25384@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> sjhg9320@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott Jerome Howard) writes: >Kaleidagraph and Igor are very good for Scientific and Engineering >purposes, but DeltaGraph produces much better output on Postscipt devices >and is one heck of a lot easier to learn and has much better documentation >and technical support. Deltagraph also lets you directly import CricketGraph, >Excel, PICT2, and EPSF files. Another program that I've seen is Passage II. Lots of options, curve fitting, macros, etc.. I have used Kaleidagraph for simple plots but Passage II for more complex curve fitting.