Maple 9.03 Now Available - comp.soft-sys.math.maple

Message from discussion Maple 9.03 Now Available

Peter Luschny

View profile

More options Dec 7 2003, 4:24 pm

Newsgroups: comp.soft-sys.math.maple

From: "Peter Luschny" <peter.lusc...@gmx.net>

Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 22:27:13 +0100

Local: Sun, Dec 7 2003 4:27 pm

Subject: Re: Maple 9.03 Now Available

  Reply to author
  |
  Forward
  | Print
  | View thread
  | Show original
  | Report this message
  | Find messages by this author
  

> "Rouben Rostamian" schrieb
> > Peter Luschny wrote:
> >> Maplesoft has released Maple 9.03 for download. [...]
> >> 9.03 also contains all updates found in 9.02 and 9.01. Existing users
> >> (9.00, 9.01, 9.02) can access the update from the Technical Support
> >> section of the Maplesoft Web site. An installation of 9.00, 9.01, or
> >> 9.02 is required for the update to function properly.
> >What about calling 9.00 Beta-1, 9.01 Beta-2,
> >9.02 ReleaseCandidate-1, 9.03 ReleaseCandidate-2?
> Maple is not freeware, as you know. How do you expect them
> to stay in business if they attempt to sell a product called
> Maple Release xx.beta-1? Would you pay for it?

Are you kidding? Of course they should not sell software
which is at that level of maturity. These are quite common
terms to describe /internal/ stages of development.

> They do their best to come up with a reasonably good product and try
> to sell it in order to pay their rent and their car loans and shoes
> for their kids.

Their work is hard and they do deserve to be paid well
for their rent, kids, cars and whatsoever other amusements -
if they do their work in a satisfactorily manner.

The soap opera they are showing right now with the
releases of 9.00, 9.01, 9.02, 9.03 within a couple of
month does /not/ indicate this.

> A new release does not mean that the development has
> reached the acme of perfection. If it did, there wouldn't have been
> much reason to go beyond Maple Release 1.0.
[...]
> The problem is, you can never tell if a particular release has
> reached the status of `true' 9. A complex software is rarely
> perfect.

I do know that. I do not complain about minor
inconveniences. I have learned to live with this.
I just don't want to buy big, substantial bugs
which hinder the use of basic features. You did
read Ken's posting in this thread, did you?

| "Is there someone can tell us why the Chinese fonts
| can be displayed correctly in "The Classic Worksheet
| Maple 9"(.mws) but not in "Standard Maple 9"(.mw)?
| In Taiwan, we still use .mws (The Classic Worksheet Maple 9),
| .mw was useless in our Windows Chinese platform for now."

Did you read what was said about the Java-interface
in this group? Or about the usefulness of Release 9
for the Mac?

> I think you should be thankful for their continued effort to provide
> the free upgrades and bug-fixes that they do.

These are not the rules of the game: To pay for bugs
and then be thankful for bug-fixes.

Did you watch Maplesoft over the years? The price went
up, their hype went up, their arrogance went up -
and the quality went down.

And you missed another point:

> How do you expect them
> to stay in business if they attempt to sell a product called
> Maple Release xx.beta-1? Would you pay for it?

How do you expect them to stay in business if they
sell a product which *is* Maple Release xx.beta-1?

I do not. And let me firmly add - I would be very
sad to see this happen.

Regards Peter

Reply to author Forward