Maple 9.03 Now Available
Maplesoft
Dear Maple Users,
Maplesoft has released Maple 9.03 for download. Maple 9.03 is a
maintenance update to Maple 9 for all platforms. Changes include:
* Reduced startup time (most noticeable on the Windows platform)
* Improvements to standard math input and formatting
* Improvements to the copy and paste mechanisms
* Improvements to Sendmail
* Improvements to Animation
* Improvements to Autosave
* Improvements to worksheet editing and formatting
* Improvements to Spreadsheets
* Improvements to Page Breaks
* Improvements to performance
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.
For details and to download, visit:
http://www.maplesoft.com/support/Downloads/index.shtml
Kind Regards,
Maplesoft
Ken Lin
> Dear Maple Users,
>
> Maplesoft has released Maple 9.03 for download. Maple 9.03 is a
> maintenance update to Maple 9 for all platforms.
There are still some problems in Chinese font display in Maple v9.03.
In fact, we "see" nothing but only a "-". I told the manager Ko since
v9.00. Now you have v9.03, but the problems are still there. 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. If Waterloo MapleSoft
can not promise the users a better and more steadier new version.
Please don't upgrade Maple so often just for some commercial
considerations.
I and my students are all Maple fun users, please spoil that.
Ken Lin
Peter Luschny
> 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?
Do you know how much time for installation,
re-installation, re-re-installation etc. you are
thieving from your customers?
And: we are still waiting for the 'true' 9. release.
Regards Peter
Axel Vogt
Hm. Indeed it sounds not inviting at all and more like M$.
I was planing to upgrade and to download the neccessary
releases at work (no transfer problems due to any size)
to burn it on 1 CD before. But: no - i would have to enter
an ID, grrr. So i will wait until i hear "no problem any
more" from _users_.
What i do not understand: Maple seems to have made a bad
error. Sad, but ok. What i want is: 1 original + 1 fix
to be sent if i buy it. Or a statement like "fixed until
...". But not a list what i have to do. And certainly no
notification that not even clearly states: "install a,b,
c .. and if you not have done already simply start with
9.04 and ignore the rest". Or so.
Really, i do not understand that, it is irritating.
---
remove the no to mail
Rouben Rostamian
Peter Luschny <peter....@gmx.net> wrote:
>"Maplesoft":
>
>> 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?
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. 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.
I think you should be thankful for their continued effort to provide
the free upgrades and bug-fixes that they do. You would have had a
reason to complain if they didn't.
>And: we are still waiting for the 'true' 9. release.
The problem is, you can never tell if a particular release has
reached the status of `true' 9. A complex software is rarely
perfect.
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying Maple is perfect. I have quite
a few gripes and pet peeves about it -- some of which I have aired in
this forum -- but the intermittent release of patches and bug fixes is
not one of them.
--
Rouben Rostamian
Vladimir Bondarenko
<bqtnu5$nkt$1...@pc18.math.umbc.edu>...
> In article <bqtg3n$26n4a1$1...@ID-64349.news.uni-berlin.de>,
> Peter Luschny <peter....@gmx.net> wrote:
> >"Maplesoft":
> >
RR> They do their best
Really? WHY exactly do you think so? How much time have you wasted in
your attempts to contact them and help them to fix all these bugs?
I started my attempts in 1993.
I have talked with Keith Geddes and Laurent Bernardin and Mike Seymour
and my impression is that you are flattering to Maplesoft ;)
RR> a reasonably good product
Yep, it has only up to several thousands distinct bugs and no more
(hopefully).
For details you may wish to visit www.cybertester.com - but remember that
now it is just the tip of the iceberg and reflects a tiny fraction of Maple
bugs. In the near future we are going to upload the next major upgrade.
RR> I think you should be thankful for their continued effort to provide
RR> the free upgrades and bug-fixes that they do. You would have had a
RR> reason to complain if they didn't.
"be thankful"?
You gotta be kidding!
Maplesoft MUST make these upgrades because without them it would go
bankrupt quickly. I remember vividly how I was excited to see Maple V
Release 2; Maple 6 was still fairly good but then something went wrong.
RR> I think you should be thankful for their continued effort to
RR> provide the free upgrades and bug-fixes that they do. You would
RR> have had a reason to complain if they didn't.
Gee! You are a Cicero ;)
But... where I have heard these smooth words?... look here, at this
guy... he has so nice look... could he be a criminal?... well, it
depends on our definitions... yes, I admit that my client have stolen
you money and because of this you are not able to do what you were
going to do but let's think WHY he did it? It's because of the most
noble reason: he had a couple of kinds and a sickly wife to support.
Do you really want to get him behind the bars? Has he killed you?
No, you are still alive though without money and you have wasted
you time trying to fix this. So what?
Best,
Vladimir Bondarenko
http://www.cybertester.com/
http://maple.bug-list.org/
http://www.CAS-testing.org/
Vladimir Bondarenko
> "Maplesoft":
>
> > Maplesoft has released Maple 9.03 for download. [...]
> 9.02 ReleaseCandidate-1, 9.03 ReleaseCandidate-2?
:)
PL> Do you know how much time for installation,
PL> re-installation, re-re-installation etc. you are
PL> thieving from your customers?
Maple 9.03 is unique in this respect, even 9.02 was better.
I am not ready to tell straight off what other application
would have made me running scared so much ;)
For the first 2 minutes I thought that I got a virus...
Windows got uncotrollable... HDD indicator was blinking...
nothing was happening...
PL> And: we are still waiting for the 'true' 9. release.
What about doing your morning exercise daily? The doctors
claim this would give you a chance to live to a ripe old age.
Also, if you are a smoker, please quit (I have done,
I am also waiting for the 'true' 9. release)
steve_H
...
>
> Vladimir Bondarenko
>
> http://www.cybertester.com/
> http://maple.bug-list.org/
> http://www.CAS-testing.org/
Do you have any insight which is more 'buggy', mathematica 5.0 or
maple 9.0* ?
I have been looking at mathematica as well, and the only thing that
prevents me from concentrating on mma are 2 things:
1. can't rotate 3D images in mma using the mouse as I can do with maple.
2. mma has ugly synatx and its programming style is not build for
prodcedural style programming which I am more used to.
Other than that, I like mma interface more than maple.
Peter Luschny
> > 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
Vladimir Bondarenko
> v...@cybertester.com (Vladimir Bondarenko) wrote in message
> > http://www.cybertester.com/
> > http://maple.bug-list.org/
> > http://www.CAS-testing.org/
>
>
> Do you have any insight which is more 'buggy', mathematica 5.0
> or maple 9.0* ?
I am afraid, it's not easy to compare Maple and Mathematica; for
example, there are some 4,500 functions in Mathematica 5 vs some
3,500 functions in Maple 9. Secondly, now I am too engaged in the
Maple testing and thus practically do not use Mathematica 5 much.
However, if you are speaking about subjective "feelings" of the
user (how often one runs across a bug etc), personally, I felt,
Mathematica 4 is buggier than Maple 8.
However, I have nothing to tell you about Maple 9 / Mathematica 5
in this respect; in MMA 5 there are many changes; hundreds of old
bugs are fixed; hundreds of new ones appeared.
Right away I have no insight about this comparison; well, possible,
I *have* an insight but I'd eschew to speak my thoughts aloud
because it would be a mere assertion (well... or my trade secret :)
> I have been looking at mathematica as well, and the only thing
> that prevents me from concentrating on mma are 2 things:
>
> 1. can't rotate 3D images in mma using the mouse as I can do
> with maple.
Two eternal (really eternal?) rivals, these days, Maple & Mathematica
are NO longer just software environments but, in a sense, two MYTHS.
There is a Maple mythology and there is a Mathematica mythology.
One of the MMA myths is that there is no possibility to rotate 3D
images in MMA. Actually, since 1999, since Mathematica 4.0 there is
such an opportunity.
Here you are:
In[1] := <<RealTime3D`
In[2] := Plot3D[Sin[x + y], {x, 0, Pi}, {y, 0, Pi}]
or something like
In[3] := Plot3D[BesselJ[0, Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]], {x, -10, 10},
{y, -10, 10}, PlotPoints -> 50, Mesh -> False]
Enjoy!
By the way, two Mathematica gurus, Jens-Peer Kuska and David Park
support the MathGl3d and DrawGraphics packages, respectively
http://phong.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/~kuska
http://home.earthlink.net/~djmp/
You also may wish to visit
http://library.wolfram.com/infocenter/
to be surprised with abundance & diversity of MMA free packages.
Or, this can be done with J/Link/LiveGraphics3D java applet.
See http://omegaconsultinggroup.com/Services/ezine19.nb
> 2. mma has ugly syntax and its programming style
A kindred soul! ;) My initial feelings were the same...
Actually, I forgot how much time precisely I needed to get
accustomed to the MMA language and started writing my own
useful programs; I believe it required a month or so; but
very simple functions you could program in 2-3 days.
Also, there is a cordon bleu, exciting in clarity, set of
62 simple examples sized with 626 to 10660 bytes at
C:\Program Files\Wolfram Research\Mathematica\5.0\AddOns\
ExtraPackages\ProgrammingInMathematica
written by Roman Maeder, one of the principal MMA makers.
Even at the risk that Stephen Wolfram will file a copyright
infringement action against me I cannot vanquish temptation
to send you this set if you are willing to have a look at
this gem; please feel comfortable to just drop me a line if
you are interested.
> is not build
> for procedural style programming which I am more used to.
Yet another Mathematica myth ;) Actually, I have written
many thousands lines using the procedural style until I
gradually have found that often there are other ways to
put it faster.
The MMA language is unique and powerful and every soul
can find the style he or she prefer.
"For most of the more sophisticated problems that you want to
solve with Mathematica, you will have to create Mathematica
programs. Mathematica supports several types of programming,
and you have to choose which one to use in each case. It turns
out that no single type of programming suits all cases well.
As a result, it is very important that you learn several
different types of programming."
"If you already know a traditional programming language such
as BASIC, C, Fortran, Perl or Java, you will probably find it
easiest to learn procedural programming in Mathematica, using
Do, For and so on. But while almost any Mathematica program can,
in principle, be written in a procedural way, this is rarely
the best approach. In a symbolic system like Mathematica,
functional and rule-based programming typically yields
programs that are more efficient, and easier to understand."
"If you find yourself using procedural programming a lot, you
should make an active effort to convert at least some of your
programs to other types. At first, you may find functional and
rule-based programs difficult to understand. But after a while,
you will find that their global structure is usually much easier
to grasp than procedural programs. And as your experience with
Mathematica grows over a period of months or years, you will
probably find that you write more and more of your programs in
non-procedural ways."
> Other than that, I like mma interface more than maple.
Me, too ;) Once I was a Maple wild fan, though... Panta rhei :)
As you have observed, there are many Maple reviews, Maple 8,
Mapl 7, Maple 6 etc, but nobody have written a review of
Maple 9, guess why ?) (well, it's a trivial puzzle for you)
For a long time, I keep thinking over the Maple mythology
and maybe I even should publish my rumination, at least, you
have given me yet another incentive to do it, thanks!
Best,
Vladimir
Vladimir Bondarenko
> > http://www.cybertester.com/
> > http://maple.bug-list.org/
> > http://www.CAS-testing.org/
>
>
> Do you have any insight which is more 'buggy', mathematica 5.0
> or maple 9.0* ?
I am afraid, it's not easy to compare Maple and Mathematica; for
example, there are some 4,500 functions in Mathematica 5 vs some
3,500 functions in Maple 9. Secondly, now I am too engaged in the
Maple testing and thus practically do not use Mathematica 5 much.
However, if you are speaking about subjective "feelings" of the
user (how often one runs across a bug etc), personally, I felt,
Mathematica 4 is buggier than Maple 8.
However, I have nothing to tell you about Maple 9 / Mathematica 5
in this respect; in MMA 5 there are many changes; hundreds of old
bugs are fixed; hundreds of new ones appeared.
Right away I have no insight about this comparison; well, possible,
I *have* an insight but I'd eschew to speak my thoughts aloud
because it would be a mere assertion (well... or my trade secret :)
> I have been looking at mathematica as well, and the only thing
> that prevents me from concentrating on mma are 2 things:
>
> 1. can't rotate 3D images in mma using the mouse as I can do
> with maple.
Here you are:
In[1] := <<RealTime3D`
or something like
Enjoy!
http://phong.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/~kuska
http://home.earthlink.net/~djmp/
http://library.wolfram.com/infocenter/
> Other than that, I like mma interface more than maple.
Me, too ;) Once I was a Maple wild fan, though... Panta rhei :)
Alec Mihailovs
Still there are a few differences between Maple and Mathematica that you
didn't mention even if I'm sure that you are aware of. I want to mention
just 2 of them.
First, postings in this group are unmoderated, so you can post whatever you
want about Maple. Mathematica group is moderated, so all of your postings
there wouldn't be accepted by moderator.
Second, Maple is (almost) free software - everything (except their built-in
functions) is available for revision and replacement. Mathematica is not.
Alec Mihailovs
http://webpages.shepherd.edu/amihailo/
Alec Mihailovs
news:8cf8cf57.03120...@posting.google.com...
> rou...@pc18.math.umbc.edu (Rouben Rostamian) wrote in message news:
> <bqtnu5$nkt$1...@pc18.math.umbc.edu>...
>
> and my impression is that you are flattering to Maplesoft ;)
As far as I can tell, Keith Geddes, Laurent Bernardin, and Mike Seymour are
great mathematicians and great computer programmers. All of my contacts with
them were extremely satisfactory. Have you ever thought that your problems
with contacting them may be caused by yours (not so nice looking at your
late postings in this newsgroup) and not their personalities?
Alec Mihailovs
http://webpages.shepherd.edu/amihailo/
Ralf
> functions) is available for revision and replacement. Mathematica is not.
Presumably you are in an institution where Maple is purchased for you.
But someone is paying.
Look in the two companies on-line stores and you will see that, for an
academic in North America, Maple is $100 MORE then Mathematica.
Joe Riel
>> Second, Maple is (almost) free software - everything (except their built-in
>> functions) is available for revision and replacement. Mathematica is not.
>
> Presumably you are in an institution where Maple is purchased for you.
> But someone is paying.
You are misinterpreting "free"; it is being used in the sense of free
as in freedom. Maple isn't open source, however, it is possible to
inspect and modify much of the code.
Joe
Stephen Forrest
> Second, Maple is (almost) free software - everything (except their built-in
> functions) is available for revision and replacement. Mathematica is not.
Yes, one can run showstat(...) or set interface(verboseproc=2) and
evaluate library procedures. One can even unprotect assigned names
and create customized versions of built-in library procedures. This is
highly useful.
However, one cannot escape the fact that Maple is proprietary commercial
software. For an individual, even for a student, it is costly, but that
in itself does not make it non-free: I could burn the latest Debian Linux
distribution and demand a thousand dollars for it, and would be operating
within the bounds of the GNU public licence.
What makes Maple "non-free" is the fact that after buying it one cannot
legally distribute it, its library code, or any derivatives of these.
Steve
Joe Riel
>
> What makes Maple "non-free" is the fact that after buying it one cannot
> legally distribute it, its library code, or any derivatives of these.
It isn't clear, at least to me, how much of the library code one is
allowed to modify and redistribute. I, along with other contributors
to this newsgroup, have at one time or another published corrections
and improvements to particular procedures in the libraries. This may
technically violate the license agreement, however, it seems close to
fair use [though fair use may not apply in a license agreement].
Regardless, I've never heard any objections to this from
WMI/Maplesoft.
Joe
Frédérique & Hervé Sainct
> For the first 2 minutes I thought that I got a virus...
> Windows got uncotrollable... HDD indicator was blinking...
> nothing was happening...
(gasp) -any macintosh user's reaction around here?
Herve
--
Frédérique & Hervé Sainct, h.sa...@laposte.net
Frédérique's initial is missing in front of the above address
l'initiale de Frédérique manque devant l'adresse email ci-dessus
Gabriel Dos Reis
| Second, Maple is (almost) free software - everything (except their built-in
| functions) is available for revision and replacement. Mathematica is not.
You must have a very singular definition of free software.
--
Gabriel Dos Reis
g...@integrable-solutions.net
Gabriel Dos Reis
Ronald Bruck
Dos Reis <g...@integrable-solutions.net> wrote:
See <http://www.gnu.org/>. And then stop spouting off about what you
know nothing of.
--Ron Bruck
Gabriel Dos Reis
Precisely. Motre specifically, have a look at
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
| And then stop spouting off about what you know nothing of.
At least, that confirms your ignorance about the issue.
Michael K Murray
Gabriel Dos Reis <g...@integrable-solutions.net> wrote:
> "Alec Mihailovs" <al...@mihailovs.com> writes:
>
> | Second, Maple is (almost) free software - everything (except their built-in
> | functions) is available for revision and replacement. Mathematica is not.
>
> You must have a very singular definition of free software.
Yes indeed -- does that mean I can get my $2,000 back :-)
Michael
Gabriel Dos Reis
:-)
I'm afraid no.
Free software implies at least unrestricted access to the source and
you should have freedom to redistribute copies.
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
Homer J. Fong
Sai nct) said:
> Vladimir Bondarenko <v...@cybertester.com> wrote:
>
>> For the first 2 minutes I thought that I got a virus... Windows got
>> uncotrollable... HDD indicator was blinking... nothing was happening...
>
> (gasp) -any macintosh user's reaction around here?
>
> Herve
Yeah, this sounds like Maple, all right...
Double-click the icon...wait...and wait...and wait. Then once it
launches, get used to seeing the spinning beach ball quite frequently.
I can't believe they released software that has such poor performance.
Shouldn't that have been spotted during development?
-- H