HP-49G+ indefinite integration

[pivoneer]

(08-26-2024 02:04 PM)carey Wrote:  

(08-25-2024 10:35 PM)pivoneer Wrote:  As for now I've noticed that HP's Erable CAS is smarter than TI-89's Derive, it provides more compact, more human-like solutions and even has settings and basic step-by-step indication.

Don’t get me wrong, Erable CAS is remarkable and beats Derive in some areas, e.g., showing solution steps as you mentioned (and many settings! but IMHO, the notion that it is “smarter than TI-89’s Derive” is mistaken and the belief that it provides “more compact, human-like solutions” is actually opposite to the experience that several others have expressed in previous years on the forum.

In fact, one of Erable’s strengths is it leaves to the user choices about how to simplify results. However this can lead to less compact, less human-like initial solutions unless one knows how to correctly apply simplifying operations, while Derive usually makes these decisions (for better or worse) for the user and seems to “understand” math.

Derive (the successor to MuMath) was a mature, well-tested CAS developed at the University of Hawaii well before TI bought it. In many respects Erable in the 49g/50g and Derive in the TI-89 were complementary, i.e., each had different strengths and weaknesses.

Yes, I suppose. There is no perfect CAS and I'm definitely going to test both of these hard out of interest. The best CAS is aways you