Christopher2222

4960 Reputation

24 Badges

11 years, 141 days

MaplePrimes Activity


These are replies submitted by Christopher2222

@eithne I'm pretty sure it's ok, but the filename for the update is labelled as 2019.2 and not 2019.2.1 How can I be sure the update on the download page is linked to the 2019.2.1 and not just the old 2019.2 file?

So that makes Amazon Fire tablets out as well, since it looks like it runs under the same architecture a 1.5 GHz quad-core ARM 4xCA53 processor.

There is a PreviewConfig tool for registering custom files, but it is only for plain text or multimedia file.  I doubt it will work with Maple files. But here's the link of where I found it if you want to try it  https://www.winhelponline.com/blog/previewconfig-tool-registers-file-types-for-the-preview-pane-in-windows-vista/

This may also help - registering a preview handler, but I do not know if it will work

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/shell/how-to-register-a-preview-handler

@student_md .m files are simple text files that can be read by notepad, hence they are readable in the windows preview pane.  Maple files (mw, mws, maple) files are proprietary to the Maple system .  Indeed yes it would be nice to preview the file.  It is similar to AutoCAD files, the files are preview(able) within AutoCAD (which Maple doesn't have) but not within the windows file directory system. 

Some files (I think) give windows/microsoft the rights to it's programming allowing the preview pane to access the information - an example is pdf files. 

I'm not sure about Mathematica files, but I doubt it's files are previewable through windows.

 

Possibly?  I don't think I know enough to say that it does.  I did run the same in a Maple 10 classic worksheet interface (has the same look and feel as Maple 7) but the multiple lighting sources was still only graphed with one. 

I'm not sure when the change occured.  Maybe between Maple 9 and Maple 9.5?
...

Just checked for Maple 9.5 only one light source works -can't do more. So have yet to find out if it works in Maple 8 or Maple 9 (anyone? I might be able to check, just need some time to find) 

@Christian Wolinski - I suspect who it might be.

@MrMarc - It would be interesting to learn Javascript or Python, but everything is done from scratch, so in that respect IMHO you'd be better off with SageMath.  Regardless is nicer to work from a base software like Maple. Also if you're slamming Maple as being closed source, then you definitely don't want to work with Mathematica - it's even more closed source than Maple is. 

What is "amateurish" about Maple?  Please point them out.  Also, what did Alec Mihailov find amateurish about Maple?  A google search and mapleprimes search finds no such reference - if it is there it is either worded differently or quite obscure.

I believe someone changed it to a post because it had real relevance that maplesoft should address - after I saw it was changed I agreed it was a good thing to do. Not sure what happened to the other one.  The fact they both got erased is unfortunate.  I was going to respond to one of them but I can't exactly remember the context of the information.

Perhaps a maplesoft administrator can restore them.

alt-f4 works in 2019.0 in windows 7.

That's a good idea of point release updates, I never thought of that.  But don't other parts outside of Maple also get updated?  Could we say that it functions exactly the same as if the point release was done inside a virtual machine where it's completely separated from a superseeded release?

I'd give them a few weeks, or at least until the end of the year to come up with a fix.  The sooner the better from a marketing standpoint.

As a makeshift for future, does anyone know if (before an update) we could pull out certain files and stick them back in if the update happens to be filled with bugs?  Like for example some main files, and I'm not sure which ones but maybe maple.bin some .dll files etc.  So if the update is a failure we can at least roll back by just copying back and writing over the new files with the old ones.  I'm sure I'm missing something and it can't be done like that now-a-days but perhaps it can.  Or maybe Maple can put in a rollback option???

Sounds like some serious issues with the 2019.2 update that need immediate attention by maplesoft.

 

It's ok in 2019.0, check if the same happens in document mode.

I believe the best way to revert to 2019.1 is to uninstall 2019, re-install 2019.0 and update to 2019.1.  There may be a better way but when Maple updates I believe it overwrites the main files and doesn't back them up which makes rolling back to a previous edition not a quick task.

 

 

Turning data into sound is called sonification.  But it's not exactly what I think you are doing but I might understand what you are trying to do.  You want to create a waveform based on previous data. 

Let's see if I understand you correctly.  So, let's say we have some sample waveform described by (sorry I'm just snipping and pasting)


which is of course periodic and looks like this

... and what you're saying is suppose we have only data (no equations) from 0..2. so what we have is just:

You want to use that data to generate further lines of the wave ie. randomly selecting from the previous distribution of ups and downs whether the wave is to go up or down (I'm guessing that is what you meant when you said "know the direction of up and down") and also the lengths of how far it will go, again based on the previous data.  Sort of like a random walk picked from the distribution of user data. 

Am I right?

Sounds pretty neat.. no pun intended.  Shouldn't be too hard to complete in maple. 

Without the help of the graph I wouldn't quickly be able to notice there are 9 critical points (3 local maxima's, 3 local minima's and 3 saddle points).

In the Student[Calculus1] package there is a CriticalPoints command but it is currently limited to one variable. (Maple 2020 Wishlist?)

With our expression we need to use fsolve and provide a range (otherwise we either get "warning, solutions may have been lost" or just the original equations back unsolved)

fx:=simplify(diff(f(x,y),x):
fy:=simplify(diff(f(x,y),y):

fsolve({fx=0,fy=0},{x=-3..3,y=-3..3})

                    {x = -0.2659375568, y = 0.4667399937}

So there's one critical point.  Is there an easier way to find critical points without graphing?

Thank you Carl and Rouben. 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Last Page 1 of 135