Have you ever used MathPad?

How can you say EureKalc is much more intuitive?
The basic operation is nearly identical. They both allow you to type in an expression and have it evaluated.

What is the "unique ability to access instantly to frequently used data and functions" ? Both allow you to define new functions and data. MathPad has a functions menu that lists its built-in functions and will insert them into the text. EureKalc doesn't even have that.

EureaKalc has a data-drawer that is simply a list of physical constants. (Most of which could not be described as "frequently used"). I was unable to find a way to transfer this information into my calculation without typing it in myself. Copy and paste didn't work. The data-drawer was less useful than a separate text file.

MathPad allows include files that will define whatever constants you want and have them directly available. There is an example include file that contains a similar list of physical constants.

You stupid ! You just have to select any data (by clicking on it in the drawer) and then you can use it in your calculations. Can you imagine a more intuitive way than that ?

Both, EureKalc and MathPad, have their strong and weak points. I like Eurekalc because of it's ease of use, it's flexibility, it's data-drawer and because it lets me enter decimal numbers using a comma instead of a dot (like we do in continental Europe, and like my numerical keypad does). But I can understand that others prefer MathPad, for instance because of it's ability to work with multidimensional arrays. The question is : what do you need, and when do you need it. You could also argue that the free statistical package "R" is a very good claculator, much more powerful than EureKalc and Mathpad. I use that one when I have to work on complicated arrays of numbers.

So let's stop squabbling about the respective pluses and minuses of EureKalc and mathPad. Try both of them and choose, following your specific needs. And above all: thanks to both developers for making this free software.

But squabbling is fun. I personally appreciate reviews that give some comparisons between similar programs.

Ok, I read the manual and figured out how to use data drawer constants but a good test of how intuitive the interface is how much you can do without reading the manual. (Assume for sake of argument that I'm not stupid).

And yes, I can think of a much more intuitive way to do it. Have it insert the constant name into your calculation when you click it or double click it. As it is, when you click nothing happens other than it turning blue in the drawer. Blue isn't a standardized signal for "now a defined constant". Also, since you can't copy and paste, you still have to know to type option-m to get a u0 into the calculation. A minor squabble, but argues against describing it as very intuitive or easy to use.

A more important flaw is that you can't really save your work. You have to re-select which constants you want every time. Saving and re-loading files was very flakey. Sometimes nothing happens, a few times the application hung and I had to force quit.

I can't agree that EureKalc has any advantage for ease of use and certainly not flexibility. MathPad allows multiple open documents and will fully save your calculation, it fully re-evaluates so that you can edit anywhere and it properly updates all results, it has more flexibility for plotting, it has plug-ins for a large number of special purpose functions ...

The only thing I saw that EureKalc has that MathPad doesn't is the option for the comma as a decimal separator. (MathPad syntax uses comma for other separators so it would be ambiguous).

I like the concept of EureKalc and if MathPad didn't exist I'd be all for it. EureKalc would like to BE MathPad when it grows up.

Mathpad hasn't been updated in 5 years.
EureKalc looks like a good starting point for a true MathCad for Mac