Talk:List of interactive geometry software

I am the author of DrGeo, I can read Dr.Geo is categorized as a very basic ruler-compass software. I suggest a deeper look when reporting about software, or it may be better to not report at all. DrGeo includes advanced features like macro-construction, embedded script, and programmaticaly defined interactive drawing. None of these features are basic ones. Oh by the way the software is translated in more than 20 languages.

For a deeper understanding look at the documentation http://www.ofset.org/articles/80 and for example the section on advanced features http://documentation.ofset.org/drgeo/fr/drgenius_49.html

So please if a deeper more acurate review is not possible, just remove this unfair commment on Dr. Geo.

And, oh by the way, I think the reference is Cabri not GSP, at least historicaly.

ok (sorry) it was just my feeling after playing with Dr.Geo for an hour, anybody could correct it after all Tosha 02:51, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cabri 3D

I was looking around on the internet when I found a program called Cabri 3D. There already seems to be some sort of Cabri software written about but I think this is a different thing. I don't know much about Cabri and what it is but I started playing around with it and it seems quite good. I think that an article should be created about the software. It seems to be an Interactive geometry software so I thought that it should be mentioned. --L e on 2323

20:50, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

"Continuity Problem" description is incorrect

(Disclosure: I am the author of The Geometer's Sketchpad.)

The description of the so-called "continuity problem" here is not accurate. Current and all versions of Sketchpad and Cabri both behave identically with respect to the posed construction. Cinderella behaves differently. The idea there was a "continuity problem" in Dynamic Geometry was introduced by the authors of Cinderella, as a critique of Sketchpad and Cabri. It has since been proved (by Thomas Gawlick, independent of any corporate affiliation) that the "continuity" that Cinderella offers comes at the cost of sacrificing the "mathematical determinism" that Cabri and Sketchpad both offer. Continuity AND determinism are both reasonable prerequisites for a robust mathematical formalism, with determinism perhaps carrying the day. (We can imagine geometric arguments that do not require continuity--Euclid never used it, for example--but domains that fail to behave deterministically can only be argued about probabilistically). Thus we might well change the discussion to talk about the "mathematical determinism problem" and list the packages that suffer it, but for most users, that claim (like the current claim about continuity) winds up being more of a marketing pitch than an essential issue about functionality and usability.

-Nicholas Jackiw, KCP Technologies 68.255.79.156 19:21, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Table

I think to make a table out of this, you are wellcome to add characteristics here what I think to include --Tosha 21:52, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Language, Macros, Java-applet, Animation, Locus, Continuous/Deterministic, Assignments, Measurement/Calculations, Platform, Proofs, Extra,...?

Free software, scriptability (both internal and external), SVG support... Shinobu 13:16, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

C.a.R. -- can trisect an angle

Beginning several versions ago, C.a.R. could perform dynamic computations; here's the process (for example) to trisect an angle:

use the angle measurement tool (a) to mark the angle you want trisected.
C.a.R. will assign that angle a name such as 'a1', and you may use the edit tool (e) to change its name. In the next step, I'll assume the angle is named 'a1'.
use the angle construction tool (.) to create an angle; specify its size as '(a1)/3'.

I've removed the claim in the article that C.a.R. can't trisect an angle. --Heath 128.173.105.144 15:16, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

C.a.R.: unfriendly...

What is meant with "unfriendly measurements"?

As for the loci, my geometry is a bit rusty, but is this different from the traces that C.a.R. does support properly? Shinobu 13:19, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disorderly, biased article

Disorderly, because it's very hard to compare the programs using the current layout.

Biased, because they're all compared to one program which is used as a kind of golden standard. Imagine an article on different operating systems written entirely from a Windows perspective.

Both of these problems could be solved by transitioning to a table, as mentioned in one of the topics above. Shinobu 13:21, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps someone should start a table here, in Talk? I had to compare ig software, and would have added info to wikipedia, if only there was some framework...66.30.117.127 18:30, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]