🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <chase-270193152616@chases_mac.jhuapl.edu> chase@aphill.jhuapl.edu (Christopher J. Chase) writes:
>I have used Matlab in the distant past. Now we are using (and spending a
>lot of money for liscenses) IDL and for one project, PV-Wave (all on UNIX
>systems under X windows). How does Matlab compare with these in terms of
>computational ability (linking in code, variety of operators, memory usage,
>etc.) and data visualization (making your own X-widget programs, image
>processing, mapping capabilities, 3-D slicing/dicing, color, etc.). For one
>thing, IDL and PV-Wave seem very expensive. Also, the variety of canned
>procedures available in Matlab toolboxes seems much greater than with these
>programs. However, my impression is that the data visualiztion and widget
>capabilities of IDL and PV-Wave are better  than Matlab.
>

We use MatLab 3.5 on a Mac Quadra, Ethernetted to a KPC Titan running AVS.
MatLab proved most valuable for its established Toolkits for signal analysis
and system identification.  In 3.5 the graphics are naive, but once we
processed our data arrays, we could export the results into:
	SerePlot and KaleidaGraph for plotting and conversion
	UNIX files on the Titan where we use AVS for 3-D visualization
		and projection onto photos and topo maps.

The rapid FTP connection between MatLab on a Mac and a very competent UNIX
box is a dream! (Given that MathWorks no longer supports MatLab on the Titan).
In that our data arrives in spreadsheet format, we need Excel anyhow.

MatLab is a convenient tool, as is Excel, but I would not want to try to
complete a major project using nothing else.  It takes a while to determine
which tool can do the task in the best way, then you develop a "style".
Even Excel can do FFTs, but it's not its forte!

In my humble opinion,
Rob Lake
BP America Research
lake@rcwcl1.dnet.bp.com