Many of the commentators and translators, as well, no doubt, as copyists, have been explicitly less than enthusiastic about their use, especially after analytic geometry, which can do most of the problems by algebra without any stock of constructions. Taliaferro stops at Book III. Heath attempts a digest of the book to make it more palatable to the reader (Heath 1896, Intersecting Conics) Fried is more true to Apollonius, supplying an extensive critical apparatus instead (Fried 2013, Footnotes). Heath, Thomas Little, ed. (1896). Treatise on conic sections, edited in modern notation. Cambridge University Press. Fried, Michael N., ed. (2013). Apollonius of Perga Conics: Books I-IV. Translated by Taliaferro, R. Catesby; Fried, Michael N. Santa Fe, NM: Green Lion Press. ISBN978-1-888009-41-5. Retrieved 1 May 2025.
Boyer 1991, p. 142, "The Apollonian treatise On Determinate Section dealt with what might be called an analytic geometry of one dimension. It considered the following general problem, using the typical Greek algebraic analysis in geometric form: Given four points A, B, C, D on a straight line, determine a fifth point P on it such that the rectangle on AP and CP is in a given ratio to the rectangle on BP and DP. Here, too, the problem reduces easily to the solution of a quadratic; and, as in other cases, Apollonius treated the question exhaustively, including the limits of possibility and the number of solutions". Boyer, Carl B. (1991). "Apollonius of Perga". A History of Mathematics (Second ed.). Wiley. ISBN0-471-54397-7.