Path: news.mathworks.com!newsfeed-00.mathworks.com!nlpi057.nbdc.sbc.com!prodigy.net!news.glorb.com!postnews.google.com!y10g2000prc.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: TideMan <mulgor@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.soft-sys.matlab
Subject: Re: Do not upgrade to Matlab2009a
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 13:02:43 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <a8593395-478c-4c7c-8011-d8a999911cdc@y10g2000prc.googlegroups.com>
References: <gs027a$8d1$1@fred.mathworks.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 202.78.152.105
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1239739363 12168 127.0.0.1 (14 Apr 2009 20:02:43 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 20:02:43 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: y10g2000prc.googlegroups.com; posting-host=202.78.152.105; 
	posting-account=qPexFwkAAABOl8VUndE6Jm-9Z5z_fSpR
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.8) 
	Gecko/2009032609 Firefox/3.0.8,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
X-HTTP-Via: 1.1 nc4 (NetCache NetApp/6.0.5P1)
Xref: news.mathworks.com comp.soft-sys.matlab:532740


On Apr 14, 7:02=A0am, "Francois Tadel" <francois.ta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've worked with almost all the recent Matlab releases (WinXP 32bits). Wi=
th each new release, I discover a few improvements a many new bugs. For my =
use, the most stable appeared to be Matlab 2007b, that's why I've kept it f=
or 2 years.
>
> I upgraded to Matlab 2009a three weeks ago, and I regret it a lot: now it=
 crashes at least 15 times per day, even because of really basic GUI operat=
ions (copy/paste, new file, open file, ...)
> It is the most unstable Matlab version since a long time...
>
> It's a shame to make people pay to get programs that are each time less r=
eliable.
>
> Mathworks should stop produce TWO new versions per year: one is enough, a=
nd they could spend the other six months to fix all the bugs introduced at =
each new release.
> It was a good idea, but obviously it doesn't work.
>
> Francois

I concur completely with Francois.
Indeed, I stopped upgrading at 2006b when I found that routines that
worked fine under 2006a did not work properly under 2006b.

For example, running matlab -r myfile from DOS executed the program
and closed down under 2006a, but stayed open under 2006b.  This may
seem trivial, but I run numerous Matlab routines on a schedule and
when I came in the day after upgrading to 2006b, there were 40 Matlabs
open.   This is not a bug, but an inconvenient change for no good
reason that I can see.  Sure, it can be accommodated, but why should I
have to?   So, I'm sticking with 2006a which is stable and has all the
features I need.