erwin Data Modeler vs. Wolfram Mathematica

I have had a chance to use few other data modeling tools from Quest and Oracle, but I am most comfortable using erwin Data Modeler. They understand your data modeling needs and have designed the software to give you a feeling of completeness when you are designing a data model.

Incentivized

We are the judgement that Wolfram Mathematica is despite many critics based on the paradigms selected a mark in the fields of the markets for computations of all kind. Wolfram Mathematica is even a choice in fields where other bolide systems reign most of the market. Wolfram Mathematica offers rich flexibility and internally standardizes the right methodologies for his user community. Wolfram Mathematica is not cheap and in need of a hard an long learner journey. That makes it weak in comparison with of-the-shelf-solution packages or even other programming languages. But for systematization of methods Wolfram Mathematica is far in front of almost all the other. Scientist and interested people are able to develop themself further and Wolfram Matheamatica users are a human variant for themself. The reach out for modern mathematics based science is deep and a unique unified framework makes the whole field of mathematics accessable comparable to the brain of Albert Einstein. The paradigms incorporated are the most efficients and consist in assembly on the market. The mathematics is covering and fullfills not just education requirements but the demands and needs of experts.

Mathematica is incompatible with other systems for mCAx and therefore the borders between the systems are hard to overcome. Wolfram Mathematica should be consider one of the more open systems because other code can be imported and run but on the export side it is rathe incompatible by design purposes. A better standard for all that might solve the crisis but there is none in sight. Selection of knowledge of what works will be in the future even more focussed and general system might be one the lossy side. Knowledge of esthetics of what will be in the highest demand in necessary and Wolfram is not a leader in this field of science. Mathematics leves from gathering problems from application fields and less from the glory of itself and the formalization of this.

• Reverse Engineering: I love the way we can import an SQL file containing schema meta data and generate ER diagram out of it. This is specifically useful if you are implementing erwin Data Modeler for an existing database.
• Forward Engineering: We use this feature very frequently. Where we do database changes in our physical and logical data models and then generate deployment scripts for the changes made.
• Physical vs Logical Models: I like to have my database model split into physical and logical models and at the same time still linked to each other. Any changes you make to logical model or physical model shows up in the other.

Incentivized

• It allows straightforward integration of analytic analysis of algebraic expressions and their numerical implemented.
• Supports varying programmatic paradigms, so one can choose what best fits the problem or task: pure functions, procedural programming, list processing, and even (with a bit of setup) object-oriented programming.
• The extensive and rich tools for graphical rendering make it very easy to not just get 2D and 3D renderings of final output, but also to do quick-and-dirty 2D and 3D rendering of intermediate results and/or debugging results.

Incentivized

• Cost is the single largest barrier to entry with this tool.
• Would like to see a greater variety of export options available for use outside of the tool, for example as a vector graphic.
• Support has been uneven at times.

Incentivized

• Should include more libraries and functions.
• Should include more functions that can be used in Machine Learning.
• Should include more functions that can be used in Data Science.

Incentivized

I had a lot of experience using erwin Data Modeler for designing data models. I think it's pretty intuitive and easy to use. It has enough features to represent your database requirements in form of a model.

Incentivized

CA customer support and our account manager have been able to support us with any issues that we have had, from managing our serial keys to issues we logged tickets to resolve. There are aspects of key management that have made it difficult over the years but support usually has worked with us.

Incentivized

Wolfram Mathematica is a nice software package. It has very nice features and easy to install and use in your machine. Besides this, there is a nice support from Wolfram. They come to the university frequently to give seminars in Mathematica. I think this is the best thing they are doing. That is very helpful for graduate and undergraduate students who are using Mathematica in their research.

Incentivized

Not listed, but I've only used alternatives built into something like the Squirrel SQL editor. That one is semi-functional but lacking many features and, in some instances, just plain wrong. The only pro there is that it's freely available and works over ODBC. I've tried some of the other free ones like Creately but didn't have much success.

Incentivized

We have evaluated and are using in some cases the Python language in concert with the Jupyter notebook interface. For UI, we using libraries like React to create visually stunning visualizations of such models. Mathematica compares favorably to this alternative in terms of speed of development. Mathematica compares unfavorably to this alternative in terms of license costs.

Incentivized

• It is difficult to assign a monetary value to it. The initial learning curve was fairly long.
• It allows us to have better support documentation.
• It allows ease of communications between functional units.

Incentivized

• Easy to solve huge mathematical equations, so it saved time there
• Doing analysis and plotting graphs is also another plus point
• Learning is very slow, and it took lot of time to learn its scripting language

Incentivized