This is like asking at a Jaguar fan-club which car you like most ...

So just a remark: Matlab symbolic = Maple, which changed in new versions (IIRC, no?)

@pagan: thx, a usefull comment!

@muzhiqingfeng: just accept that it has a meaning and use something like 'theD' if you need it.
In case you need it really that much you can override and abuse it on your own risk (not sure,
how the system would behave after that ...):

  unprotect(D);

  D:=5;
  D;
  D(exp);
                                D := 5
                                  5
                                  5

@pagan: thx, a usefull comment!

@muzhiqingfeng: just accept that it has a meaning and use something like 'theD' if you need it.
In case you need it really that much you can override and abuse it on your own risk (not sure,
how the system would behave after that ...):

  unprotect(D);

  D:=5;
  D;
  D(exp);
                                D := 5
                                  5
                                  5

I am not a product manager, but that would be the last a company will do.

Even an Open Source project would not do it - because it is boring - but
Maple has commercial reasons:

Essentially they live from 2 sources: new users and those buying updates
(often called maintenance contract or subscription, I think Maple avoids
that wordings by a special pricing policy [which - by the way - ignores
currency exchange rates, sigh]).

It is mere speculation to get more new users through carring for old
versions. And concurrent users might be missing 'some motivations' to
pass to new versions - why not just wait?

Thus you would loose volume of sales.

To give an example: only 1 of our customers for a certain product wanted
to have asserted by contract, that we maintain the SW for at least 8 years
(being responsible for those contracts I know where we could break anyway).

However all pay ~ 1/6 of the initial amount for maintaining and upgrades,
1/7 is a 'general rule' for life cycle costs.

If Maple would spent only 20% of their development capacity for outdated
versions - without turnover for upgrades - they may vanish (and that is
almost nothing caring for 5 old versions - while doing it in a significant
size it will be deathly).

Remembering figures posted by Alec on their concurrent situation
their revenue is not so huge anyway for a product company:

http://www.mapleprimes.com/blog/alec/maplesoftsalestatistics

15'' USD ~ 22'' EUR at 120 employess ~ 175' EUR per employee and year,
where external costs of sales are ignored (the resellers) and ignoring the
fact that a product compny usually has large additional costs for marketing.

Thus they may be at something like 140' € compared to a pure SW company.
Not bad.

Which may become critical: now spending development for nothing and
being faced with rising USD (=loosing foreign income) you would never
go that way: just assume that 1/3 may be selled off Americas.

Instead you try to reduce development costs (that ugly interface to check
different platforms) and find new fields (towards Engineering, Maple Sim)
and empower Marketing and Sales.

But you will not care for 'Poor Dogs' (that is not my term).

Actually they do not even have the power to considerably improve Math in
the respectively new version.

And now: read the sales again and assume increasing prices: they are
probably selling less over the years.

Just some rough guesses and my 2 Cents ...

 

I agree certainly, but do not intend to use some of the intended (without justifying that now):

- promoting
- correct spellings
- formatting

PS: Promote to front page seems to be via content (Navigation on the upper LHS), selecting item and then the update option.

hm ... I see what you mean (enforcing that int becomes the expression).

But I think that solving the problem 'naturally' is different: remembering cosh as exp
allows to identify the offending term. Now recognize we have log of that and thus a
kind of inverting. And log turns products to sums. Thus try to write as product and
stare at it. Without any CAS one sees on paper (or on screen, which asks for abuse)
what is the result (for the problem under consideration).

hm ... I see what you mean (enforcing that int becomes the expression).

But I think that solving the problem 'naturally' is different: remembering cosh as exp
allows to identify the offending term. Now recognize we have log of that and thus a
kind of inverting. And log turns products to sums. Thus try to write as product and
stare at it. Without any CAS one sees on paper (or on screen, which asks for abuse)
what is the result (for the problem under consideration).

You only want it that way because you know it. But what if working with negative t is desired ?

Perhaps my question was too hasty and lame.

*One* systematic way is to look in implementations for elementary function, they certainly have lots of tricks, but who usually does that ...

For example: |z| = sqrt( x^2+y^2 ). I doubt one can convince Maple to spit out a formula working for double precision allowing z = 1e200 + 1e200 * I.

You only want it that way because you know it. But what if working with negative t is desired ?

Perhaps my question was too hasty and lame.

*One* systematic way is to look in implementations for elementary function, they certainly have lots of tricks, but who usually does that ...

For example: |z| = sqrt( x^2+y^2 ). I doubt one can convince Maple to spit out a formula working for double precision allowing z = 1e200 + 1e200 * I.

(this is also in reply to Robert Israel's answer to me)

I think it is just experience and a 'good eye' (not sure about a correct English expression for that), it is around avoiding numerical errors and I am not even aware of some cookbooks for that (I just write in on some notepads on my table). Perhaps Maple does not have an systematic approach for such things

(this is also in reply to Robert Israel's answer to me)

I think it is just experience and a 'good eye' (not sure about a correct English expression for that), it is around avoiding numerical errors and I am not even aware of some cookbooks for that (I just write in on some notepads on my table). Perhaps Maple does not have an systematic approach for such things

Can one see ln(cosh(t)) = t + ln((1+exp(-2*t))/2) using Maple or how did you come up with it?

Edited: I mean by 'machine' (not by hand ...)

Can one see ln(cosh(t)) = t + ln((1+exp(-2*t))/2) using Maple or how did you come up with it?

Edited: I mean by 'machine' (not by hand ...)

I always login with my user name (email does not work, I just tried that) and never had problems, having blanks in it.

However I mostly do it with Firefox (or an old IE), may be you have a specific situation, where blanks are translated by the browser?
Or your password (I only use ASCII characters for that, no blanks).

While for the username upper or lower case does not matter it does for the password

Edited to add, that I always completely clear the cash if closing my browser (and also do not have a problem if having not logged our properly, which I do as a rule)