I detected a slight mocking in the comparison of Maple on Mathematica's website. 

I think Maple respects Mathematica as a competitor as shown in the Maplesoft comparison as it also highlights areas where Mathematica proved better.

@Samir Khan Already looks interesting.  Be interested to know what it's about.  I should have made that 15 points.  I didn't expect anyone else to vote up, I will be the third person to vote up then.  Thanks for letting me know.

Most of your blogs I find quite interesting.

@JonMcLoone your comments are most welcome. 

I have noticed Mathematica doesn't yet have a Mathematica10 comparison to Maple2015

Ok thanks for the explanation, makes sense now as to why the white value stayed high for the first half of the animation.

@Carl Love That one image is one to question.  Probably similar to unsharp mask.  The lisence plate one though I do agree is genuine.

 ** I've changed the title of the post from images to image to more reflect the issue in question. **

@Carl Love "restore a blurred image" the only way I think Mathematica could fix that image the way they show is if Mathematica itself blurred the image in the first place. 

Of course this is a Maple forum.  Maple doesn't have a similar function.  We have convolve but not deconvolve.  And as for Mathematica to pull a stunt like that gets to the heart of business trickery (guile).

Deconvolve might be a command Maple could add in the future? 

Comparisons are constructive.  They show the user or prospective buyer where the weaknesses and strengths are, mainly weaknesses since the strengths are marketed for sales.

In a corporate sense it shows what areas need to be improved on, or included, in the next release. 

I can't see a comparison as being silly.

So being that the site is not indexed by google I wonder if the search within mapleprimes will be adjusted.

It seems if the first 3 points created don't describe a plane it fails.

with(geom3d):

point(A,0,0,0),point(B,1,0,0),point(C,2,1,0),point(E,2,0,0):#swapping points E and C

AreCoplanar(A,B,C,E)
                                       true

@rit I don't think this will help but worth a try.  Try loading the plots package with(plots): first and see what happens.  It could be the internal plot command is somehow messed up and loading the plots package may fix it at least temporarily.

@rit works in M18

Were you perhaps referring to this mapleprimes thread here?

http://www.mapleprimes.com/questions/42390-Spider--Fly-Dudeney-Problem--A-New-Twist#answer79306

In the movie The enemy below (1957), the captain poses a hypothetical problem after loosing contact with the submarine. This persuit problem reminded me of this movie.  We could apply the math to see how close he was indeed.

The script

Echo faded. I've lost contact.
- Lewis can't find him, sir.
- Secure underwater search.
- Reduce speed to two-thirds.
- Secure underwater search.
Reduce speed to two-thirds.
Mr Mackeson.
- I'm giving you a hypothetical problem.
- Aye, Captain?
Take our last contact
with the target as a start.
Our course was 164, sir.
Give the target a course of 260, keep him on
it for 30 minutes at a speed of four knots.
Bring him back on course 140
for 30 minutes at a speed of eight knots.
We'll hold our present course
and speed for half an hour.
From there, give me a course
and speed to intercept the target.
- Will we make a lost-contact search?
- We won't catch this bird in a search pattern.
I'm sure he's come off our keel
and scooted in the opposite direction.
Our course would be 239 degrees,
speed 19 knots.
We would intercept in 28 minutes
from the beginning of the run, sir.
- All right, we'll try it.
- Target might not come back on course 140.
I think he will. He's got an important mission.
Nothing'll stop him short of being sunk.
- Pass the word to battle stations: stand easy.
- Aye aye, sir.
He fades, Herr Kapitn.
He goes away.
You think he's given up, Herr Kapitn?
It's possible.
But, to be certain,
we hold this course for a while,
before we turn again to 140.