MathCad 12.1 1

[zdas04]

I "upgraded" to 12.1 last night and now version 12 won't open at all. Luckily I still have version 11 installed and haven't been saving files to the new .xmcd format so I can get along with V11 until I have time to deal with MathSoft and their interesting security arrangements.

There wasn't much in the Mathcad Collaboratory on this, so I'm thinking it might have been operator error, but I don't know what I did beyond hitting "install".

Anyone else had problems with the "upgrade"?

David

David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering

http://www.muleshoe-eng.com

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

The harder I work, the luckier I seem

 

[IRstuff]

Dave,

If you've read the collab, then you know that very few users have reported being happy about ANY version of 12.

As for service pack upgrades, it's possible that 12 is similar to other versions of MC; in that only a virgin install followed immediately by SP installation seems to be reliable.

Best bet would be to:
> Uninstall 12
> Reboot
> Install 12
> Install SP(s)



TTFN

 

[zdas04]

IRstuff,
I reached the same conclusion, but when I tried to uninstall I got a Microsoft "Installation Failed" message. When I went back to the disk to see if they had a MC specific uninstall they didn't and the Install program failed in the first step.

I sent an e-mail to customer service, but that response is probably 5-7 days.

I'm thinking that the ads I've been getting for Maple look pretty cute.

David

David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering

http://www.muleshoe-eng.com

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

The harder I work, the luckier I seem

 

[zdas04]

I've heard back from MathSoft and I followed their detailed instructions (RegEdit, multiple reboots, etc.). I reinstalled MathCad 12.0 and it worked as well as 12 has ever worked. I stupidly ran the 12.1 patch and it completed "normally". Then the program would open, but it wouldn't calculate anything. Type in "444*ft=" and get a lightbulb indefinately (I waited 10 minutes for a result that should have taking a fraction of a second).

I gave up and exorcised v12 from my machine and went back to v11 (which was fairly stable and would run all my old sheets).

Now I'm looking at Maple and Mathmatica to see if I can convince myself either one is worth over $1,700 US.

David

 

[IRstuff]

Dave,

I'm not sure how much of the collab postings you read, but Tom Gutman has basically state unless there is a specific feature of v12 that you need, you should probably stay with the existing version.

And until v13 comes out, I would recommend likewise. v13 looks to be the point at which the stuff that was introduced in v12 will be more correctly implemented.

Is there a specific reason for upgrading or switching?

TTFN

 

[zdas04]

I don't even remember now why I switched. I was doing a bunch of .NET VB programming and MathSoft convinced me that implementing MathCad in .NET would make something easier (I can't remember what, I've never used a .NET link to MathCad).

I was upgrading because the GENFIT program I got off the collab has an undefined variable within a programming structure that I just can't figure out. I hadn't run the GENFIT sheet in a few months and needed an equation for a complex set of data really badly yesterday. Now 24 hours later, I'm about where I was when I opened v12 to do what should have been simple. Developing the equation took 20 minutes, deciding to abandon v12 took 23 hours and change.

I went to MathCad in 1993 because I was fed up with the ugly user interface in Mathmatica. I just downloaded a trial version of Mathmatica Pro and the input is still the format that gave me nightmares in grad school. I may just stick with v11 until 6 months after v13 comes out. I'll be damned if I'll be a test dummy for MathSoft again.

David

 

[IRstuff]

v13 is just starting beta test, so we'll see how this round goes ;-)

TTFN

 

[dozer]

You guys are making me feel good about my decision to quit updating Mathcad. We went through so much pain with 2001 that after we got v11 and everything that we use seemed to be working, we just let our maintenance lapse. It's going to be very hard for them to convince me it's worth going through the misery of updating ever again. We just don't do enough "gee-whiz" stuff to justify the expense and frustration.

 

[IRstuff]

M13 promises to be faster than M11 in some aspects, but I would certainly want a "test drive" of M13 to verify that what you are doing will actually get a benefit.

TTFN

 

[zdas04]

Well, a pencil and paper is faster than 12, so if the continue the trend 11 was pretty stable and pretty fast, 12 was buggy and really slow, Will 13 even open?

Sorry, I'm just a lot bitter about my experiances with 12.1 and my search of the competitors was very disapointing.

David

 

[14159]

I think the Mathcad 12.1 complaints are overblown. While I'd never claim it to be bug-free or the most stable program I've ever used, it is still extremely useful. I bought Mathcad 12.1 in May and use it more than any other program on my computer (I didn't have 11). I will be very happy if 13 fixes the problems. 12.1 crashes about once per day and gives a goofy error about every 3rd or 4th time I try to open it. It's not as fast as it should be and the files are bigger than necessary. Those are the only problems I can think of. From reading replies and listening to others talk about 12.1, I would've assumed that the program couldn't add 8+6 and get 14. It's simply not THAT bad.

14159

 

[zdas04]

Overblown????? I "upgraded" from 12.0 to 12.1. After the mandatory reboot it took 20 minutes to open. Then I typed "444*ft=" expecting it to give me a number of meters. It gave me exactly nothing. Locked up my machine. The MathSoft Help could only suggest reformating my hard disk.

12.0 took 10 minutes to open a worksheet I use all the time. It is a big sheet, but 11.1 takes 20 seconds to open it.

It is people that are happy with programs that

crashes about once per day and gives a goofy error about every 3rd or 4th time I try to open it. It's not as fast as it should be and the files are bigger than necessary

that allows MathSoft to foist this crap on people.

David

 

[IRstuff]

Even TG is faintly optimistic about the trend from 12 to 13.

TTFN

 

[Gearhead]

Wow
A lot of unhappy users. Come on over to TK

 

[GregLocock]

Do you get a commission? Why not just carry on using the version of Mathcad they already have?



Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[dozer]

zdas04,

I couldn't agree more. For some reason we've come to accept this B.S. from software developers tha "it's very complicated so you've got to expect some errors". Crashing once a day is not acceptable, but the only way these guys are going to stop writing this crap is if we, the consumer, quit buying it.

 

[MJKing]

I am a little surprised with your experience with MathCad 12.1. I upgraded to MathCad 12 and had all kinds of problems with the software not opening, existing worksheets refusing to open and execute, random crashes, extremely slow performance, licensing files, the list goes on and on. When I installed the 12.1 patch most of these issues went away or improved some. But even the performance of the "improved" MathCad 12.1 is still unacceptable. MathSoft felt my pain via e-mails. It is very slow!

If they beta tested 12 and then released it, why would we expect version 13 to be any better? I will be very interested to see ow they release version 13, price version 13, and how many users move to version 13 right away. I think that MathSoft's credibility is very low with long term users.

I go back to MathCad 4 and can say that version 12 was by far the most flawed piece of software thay have released in my experience. In my opinion, the best was version 2000 followed closely by 11.

Martin

 

[IRstuff]

The difference is that M12 was a major rewrite of the Mathcad file format, interpreter and operational structure. M13 is evolutionary upgrade to M12.

TTFN

 

[zdas04]

There seems to be a pattern to their releases. 2000 was pretty good. 2001i was the worst up to v12. V11 is good. V12 is the worst ever. On that pattern, v13 has a chance.

David