I am also happy about the expanded linear mixed models abilities
promised in the announcement. Was the impication though that there
would be no additional "non linear" mixed models capabilities? Tim
On Apr 5, 2005 11:18 AM, Michael Ingre <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2005-04-05, at 15:58, Steichen, Thomas J. wrote (in part):
>
> > It is with some curiosity that I note that previous such announcements
> > have led to an immediate and wide-ranging discussion on Statalist,
> > yet this message was met with thunderous silence. My question is why?
>
> [snip]
>
> > . Perhaps what 9 offers is not of interest?
>
> I can only speak for my self, but I was very excited when I read the
> news. I can't wait to play around with the new mixed procedures. The
> long wait since Roberto G. Gutierre's early announcement
> (http://www.stata.com/statalist/archive/2004-04/msg00721.html) is now
> over. Maybe my expectations are too high for my own good, but I'm sure
> Stata will be very competitive in this segment.
>
> On 2005-04-05, at 14:59, David Airey wrote:
> >
> > Wonderful!!!!!
> >
> > I look forward to being the first to send questions to this list on
> > linear mixed models.
> >
> > ;)
>
> Not if I can beat you to it ;)
>
> Michael
>
> *
> * For searches and help try:
> * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
> * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
>
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
