Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

The PTC Community email address has changed to Learn more.

How Maple Flow Compares to Mathcad

24-Ruby III

How Maple Flow Compares to Mathcad


I tried to give it an honest evaluation, but found it extremely slow on my PC. I have an i7 8CPU @3.6 MHz, with 16 GB of ram and a SSD hard drive. Maybe they have done something in the last couple of months to speed it up. 

If I am not mistaken you have to buy both Maple and Maple Flow. 

From the Maple Flow purchase site, it appears that a copy of Maple is included with the price of Maple Flow:


May try the trial version, but initial reaction is the price could well be prohibitive, even if was better than MathCad.

Okay, I downloaded it; evaluation until 6/25.


Opened the tutorial to learn the basics.  It's going to be a steep learning curve!


In the tutorial (which I would think had been worked to perfection), typed a variable, followed by a colon (for colon/equal) then a number--got a red box "unhandled exception."  Typed the variable name in free space, below that typed name = , got "name = name.  (Great!)  Typed "name:6---got "unhandled exception!"  (If I double underline (to create a subscripted name the assignment works, but a simple variable name will not permit a numeric assignment.  And this is the tutorial page!


Not impressed so far.  And it's slow.

I'm also evaluating Maple Flow


A name with no subscript: you need to type colon and equals (not just colon) to create a definition (the tutorials is in correct according to their tech support)

A name with a subscript: you need to type colon to create a definition

I thought it would be interesting to do a side by side comparison of a relatively simple calculation, so I've compared my response to Fred's question about a weir -  see below.


I didn't use units in Maple flow as I couldn't get the plot to work properly with them, though the individual calculations worked ok with them (it's likely that a more experienced Maple flow user would be able to get the plot done with units).  There are some syntax differences as might be expected - the above shows a difference in the way functions are defined.  

At present I find Mathcad easier to use -  but I've been using Mathcad for over 20 years, while I've been using Maple flow for one day!


Maple flow as above, but with symbolics and units:





Thanks for the test. I had trouble getting even that far. Even a few simple calculations took forever. 

I also am biased as I have used Mathcad for at least 25 years. But I did want to see if there was a viable alternative. Pricing is a problem with me as well.

My comparation (with and without units).



With units


Encouraged by Alan, I've been playing with Mapleflow.  Since a lot of my effort required units and since there appeared to be an issue with units on plots, I've spent most of my time there.

  • While Maple has commands to add a unit to the list, it doesn't look like 'flow can;  the command doesn't throw an error, but it has no effect.  (I have not been able to create a unit for "g," one unit gravity at earth's surface.  We often measure acceleration in g's)
  • Units in plots works sometimes, but the effect is not consistent or predictable:Fred_Kohlhepp_0-1623506854932.png

    (Note that (I believe) the vertical axis is correct, but the horizontal axis is not.)  This one is wrong completely



I like Mathcad because I don't (often) need to develop long scripted strings in unyielding programming language.  Mapleflow seems to be an abbreviated front end to Maple, not the white board it claims to be.


Needs work!

I haven't used Maple Flow so far, but, yes, here I think that Maple Flow has some unpleasantness (at least as it seems at first glance) as @Fred_Kohlhepp says if you have to write lines of code to implement things that you implement in Mathcad without lines of code and which are intuitive and easy to use.

For now, Maple Flow is just beginning, which is more difficult to say how much it is suitable to be used or not for the future, given that other possible improvements will follow.

But anyway, if you have to write lines of code to implement things (even a chart), then it's not so pleasant.
Moreover, Maple (at least as far as I know so far, and if I'm not mistaken) has procedural programming language, which is somehow.


Oh, Mathcad is Mathcad, and Maple is Maple, and never the twain shall meet,

Till Earth and Sky stand presently at God's great Judgment Seat;

But there is neither Mathcad nor Maple, Border, nor Breed, nor Birth,

When two strong men stand face to face,

tho' they come from the ends of the earth!

23-Emerald III


Mathcad and Maple (MapleV version 4) have met, and quite successfully, in Mathcad 3 to 13, with Mathcad 11 as (in my view) the best.



It was not a love marriage, but a marriage of convenience, which ended quickly.

Thanks, @ValeryOchkov you get a "Tolstoy" award for a literary contribution to the threads!

Thank you!
By the way, I am currently finishing work on the book "Leo Tolstoy and mathematics", where I use Mathcad to illustrate examples.