electricpete
Electrical
- May 4, 2001
- 16,774
This thread is about Smath free math software:
This software was previously discussed in 2009 here
thread724-252737
I don't think there have been any threads since then, but there have been some substantial improvements:
1 - it is now unit-aware!
2 - it has fairly good documentation, which is necessary because there is a fair learning curve for this software (not likely you can pick it up and start using it without studing the software itself for a little bit)
A good summary in 1 pdf here:
There was also a series of videos from Professor Urroz. I thought video 1 was outstanding, showing how to do simple calculations with units (remaining video's not worth much for smath). I tried similar examples as he went (stopping the video as necessary) and by the end of the video I could do it myself. I can't find the link at the moment.
What I personally find smath handy for is quick simple calculations involving units. Unit conversions are done automatically. It also acts something like an equation editor, making even nested equations look pretty.
Also, you can create a portable (flash drive) version of the program by installing onto your pc and then copying that directory from your hard drive to your flash drive and then clicking the flash drive .exe file to launch. That is handy in my work environment where we are not allowed to install things onto our pc hard drives.
For more complicated problems, I tend toward other tools. Smath is implementing "snippets" which is supposed to support a more structured programming environment, but seems to fall short. I would lean towards my favoriates (everyone's got an opinion I know) Matlab/excel for numerical intensive calcs, my ancient version of Maple sans units for more involved symbolic calcs like simultaneous symbolic equations/differential equations. My understanding is smath is similar less-capable version of mathcad...can't comment because I don't have mathcad. But none of these other software mentioned here is free, so it's probably not even appropriate to compare smath to them.
=====================================
(2B)+(2B)' ?
This software was previously discussed in 2009 here
thread724-252737
I don't think there have been any threads since then, but there have been some substantial improvements:
1 - it is now unit-aware!
2 - it has fairly good documentation, which is necessary because there is a fair learning curve for this software (not likely you can pick it up and start using it without studing the software itself for a little bit)
A good summary in 1 pdf here:
There was also a series of videos from Professor Urroz. I thought video 1 was outstanding, showing how to do simple calculations with units (remaining video's not worth much for smath). I tried similar examples as he went (stopping the video as necessary) and by the end of the video I could do it myself. I can't find the link at the moment.
What I personally find smath handy for is quick simple calculations involving units. Unit conversions are done automatically. It also acts something like an equation editor, making even nested equations look pretty.
Also, you can create a portable (flash drive) version of the program by installing onto your pc and then copying that directory from your hard drive to your flash drive and then clicking the flash drive .exe file to launch. That is handy in my work environment where we are not allowed to install things onto our pc hard drives.
For more complicated problems, I tend toward other tools. Smath is implementing "snippets" which is supposed to support a more structured programming environment, but seems to fall short. I would lean towards my favoriates (everyone's got an opinion I know) Matlab/excel for numerical intensive calcs, my ancient version of Maple sans units for more involved symbolic calcs like simultaneous symbolic equations/differential equations. My understanding is smath is similar less-capable version of mathcad...can't comment because I don't have mathcad. But none of these other software mentioned here is free, so it's probably not even appropriate to compare smath to them.
=====================================
(2B)+(2B)' ?