I find in a product specification brochure for Maple 12 "Maple includes over 4,000 computational functions to deliver
the richest set of computation tools for any area in mathematics, science, or engineering."

So the 3902 functions before is a little off. 

**edit added

Also just found in a technical spec

Maple 10 - has over 3500

I was able to locate a value not verified by Nasser who compared Mathematica7 and Maple12's total number.

He stated there were 628 top level standard library commands and an additional 116 packages that can be loaded using with().  The total of all the above worked out to 3902. 

So we have one unverified statistic for M12 - 3902 functions.  M16 has over 5000 (the exact value is unknown) but we know it has 270 new functions over M15.  Or is it M15 has 270 new functions over M14 (not sure on that one). 

I'm sure we can write a little program or proc to find the total number but I don't know how to do that.  Then we can just apply that to earlier versions of Maple.  Then collaborate them all to produce an interesting graph.  Any help?

I speculated version change equaled revenue and suspected that was maplesofts model.  It could be totally wrong but that was my interpretation, it may in fact not be the reason at all for yearly releases. 

As for Mathematica, I wouldn't say translating a kernel is a limitation, I think that is small change and really not a factor.  I believe Wolfram just doesn't see the benefit of his company releasing new versions year after year and expecting his customers to purchase it every year. 

Maybe it's some kind of price point?  Why sell, say, to 50% of your customers year after year when you can sell to maybe 100% of your customers every other year.  (- not that that's what would happen but it could happen - just using it as a possible example - who knows how consumerism models show those statistics ... perhaps we could use maple to digest such statistics wherever they may be ... )  But car companies release new models on a yearly basis, however that is an entirely different beast altogether ... I digress, that is manufacturing and this is software. 

I surely think Wolfram would release on a yearly basis if he could but he doesn't which tells me he knows something.  He runs a successful and profitable company, maybe Maplesoft should follow his suite?  Then again the appetite and thirst for a newer version is always in the minds of avid users who would most certainly jump on the opportunity to buy the newest version every year if they could ... then again it sometimes depends on if it's in our budget for this year or not.  Giving an extra year on that budget might even help a little.

@Ronan see ?op for details

It extracts operands of an expression.  Or from a list one op removes one set of brackets.

@Ronan see ?op for details

It extracts operands of an expression.  Or from a list one op removes one set of brackets.

I suppose the business model has something to do with it.  Version change = revenue.  Added update = no revenue, BUT the added updates increases customer satisfaction. 

I think if Maplesoft announced a new version were to be updated or supported through even just 2 years, they would see a higher number of sales, but without access to actual numbers I can say whatever I want and it might not make sense in Maplesofts business model, but I can at least offer my input.  I have M12 and access on occassion to newer versions, I am close to making an upgrade but not quite yet.  News of longer support for a version would certainly push me over that threshold to make a purchase. 

Mathematica seems to follow a 2 -3 year cycle.  As Maple does, Matlab also looks like it follows a yearly release schedule.  I would like the 2-3 year schedule.

@Markiyan Hirnyk 16.04 would be nice. 

Maple 10 got up to 10.06.  Since then, there has been only 2 fixes per version until Maple 15 which only saw one minor fix. 

The gist behind the fewer updates were that more bugs would be fixed for the update.  Unfotunately, fewer updates means a much less up to date version when the new release comes along and a less refined version. 

I would almost suggest to make a final update to a version at least two months prior to a new release (meaning February) or at least have one update in the new year prior to a new release.  Failing that, I don't think it's too much to ask for an update every 3 months (that would put us on par with a 16.04 version) and it would also give us an update for Christmas!  What an excellent Christmas gift.  And one more to look forward to in the new year ... COOL!  That would be nice but I won't hold my breath on it.

Just a bit of positive feedback ... Excellent work!  The speed up from 40 sec to 1/2 a sec just shocked me.  I didn't think code could be improved so much.  Great application.

I use that too.  Unfortunately it's a compilation listing of everything, maple questions, student questions (that is a gray area as student and maple questions could be similar - ultimately though student questions would come from people using maple in some schooling course and maple questions could be from others or both), posts, blogs, application examples and libraries (although they are mainly posts - but posts seem to be multitasking a few things which should be sub-categorized), technical discussions, mapleprimes suggestions, maple software suggestions, and stories to name a few.

I like the subcategorized listings, and I wish it could be done to the recent section of the mapleprimes site.

How is the progress with maplecloud synchronization?  Is there any?

Alec mentioned in another post he was able to access the cloud with Maple14.  What has come about with that project?

You could instead test the value being true

Using the boolean value stored in a variable but stored as a membered value, using the if statement throws a hiccup in versions prior to 16. 

l;
          3

is(l<100);
                  true

howver when we try to use it in the if statement (as I mentioned above) maple gets confused.

we could also do something like
l:=parse(convert(l,string));
                                             l:=3

and force maple to read it as the integer we thought it was going to read.  After completing the above command we could then continue with the original if statement.

if l<100 then print("yes") end if:

of course your work-around by multiplying by 1 was a much better solution.

You could instead test the value being true

Using the boolean value stored in a variable but stored as a membered value, using the if statement throws a hiccup in versions prior to 16. 

l;
          3

is(l<100);
                  true

howver when we try to use it in the if statement (as I mentioned above) maple gets confused.

we could also do something like
l:=parse(convert(l,string));
                                             l:=3

and force maple to read it as the integer we thought it was going to read.  After completing the above command we could then continue with the original if statement.

if l<100 then print("yes") end if:

of course your work-around by multiplying by 1 was a much better solution.

@PatrickT I agree upvoting for comments and the awesome post.  However the upvote settings would totally mess up the conversation, that needs to be addressed as well.

Ironically searching flythrough on mapleprimes brings up only one single post. 

Someone coded readmp3 and writemp3 for matlab.  I wonder if someone's up for the challenge to write one for MAPLE?

Thanks acer for the quick refresh.  A while ago in a thread I had written answered or suggested (can't quite remember) something to do with real and imaginary parts of a fourier transform of a signal and I believe there was a reply that suggested I wasn't accounting for the imaginary part.  It was somewhat of a bother that I couldn't exactly remember what it was.  Ultimately I could not find the thread which would satisfy my curiosity.  Thanks acer for some tips.