Currently textplot3d only changes position.  It does not change size or orientation as you rotate the graph nor does it change size within the boxed limits when you zoom. 

I suggest a command fixed=false/true to the textplot3d command.  The default being the way it acts now, the other for textplot to remain fixed relative to the graph orientation.  Even perhaps an orientation option .. orientation=viewer (always facing out to you and horizontal to the screen - as it is now)  x , y , z (facing these axes) there's a million ways to do it, just some ideas.

Also labels on the x-axis - if it's too crowded they overlap each other, but if you could angle them it would be okay.

What I meant with live 3d plot panning is similar to how live 2d plot panning works.  When you pan a live 2d plot, the graph is updated to plot the data outside the current view as you pan across.  With a live 3d plot (actually I'm not sure how useful this could be, was just an idea) as you pan the plot the 3d plot would be updated to view the surface in a new boxed area.  INTERFACE_SMARTPLOT3d seems to work exactly the same as plot3d - ... let me know if I need to elaborate a little more. 

Regarding more user programmable properties.  In agreement with point 3 you made, all options available to right clicking on a graph should be user programmable, but I think they are anyway.  Mainly I was meaning for things that ncould be clicked on, to do I would like also to be able to do via programming.  I originally had Tables in mind, insert and manipulate them programmatically.

Live 3d plot panning

There is extra built in data that is not present in Maple.  Astronomical data (orbit information on objects) - of course Maple could import them, Mathematica has some of it already bundled.  Built in data on worldwide cities.  Those are only a couple I could find.

In Maple 17 I wish an application center dvd that contains all the apps in a similar searchable format to the app center on a dvd which also can be updateable by the user. 

** edit ** I have deleted irrelavent content

More user programmable properties

@ Markiyan - Did I just imagine content here?  Or did it actually disappear?  I thought this was a question with an indented comment and now it is a post with no comments. 

Luckily I have stayed with Maple from the beginning and have not been frustrated by the Mathematica language.

I have noticed Maple focuses on the Math within it's system, while Mathematica seems to focus on bundling huge amounts of resource data.  Anyone care to compare the install sizes?  

The large glut of data Mathematica packages with it's system seems overly much doesn't it? 

For interest I had come across an old review (passe yes but probably relevant to the large mathematica user base size) http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=1562842  back to the Maple 5 mathematica 4 era.  A couple of users falsely wrote that the Maple student version was a crippled version of the full version.  To my knowledge Maple's student version has always been, and always was, just as fully functionally as the professional version.  Another persons choice was influenced by the choice of another to go with mathematica.  These opinions and choices probably influenced thousands of other people.  (Just my opinion)  As a search for mathematica vs maple back in those days probably brought up that very web page.

Just for fun, it would be interesting to compare his personal observations today, to Maple 16.

I could have sworn I saw that model in the maple application center. 

I remember seeing a simulation of the 9 link model somewhere but I can't remember where.  It might have been in a maplesim demonstration video. 

Can someone verify that?
** edit add ** funilly enough double clicking the animation above produces the animation. 

Unfortunately the link to the model is not the link to the model.

Sorry, no disrespect intended.  A single function surface is a term I made up - probably likely a misunderstanding of the terms myself - but supposed to have meant a function (equation) describing one surface, when graphed, that is not observationally separate from another created from the same equation. 

**edit deleted equation which I thought had seperate surfaces when in fact after copying over didn't pay attention to comma for second equation. 

Sorry, no disrespect intended.  A single function surface is a term I made up - probably likely a misunderstanding of the terms myself - but supposed to have meant a function (equation) describing one surface, when graphed, that is not observationally separate from another created from the same equation. 

**edit deleted equation which I thought had seperate surfaces when in fact after copying over didn't pay attention to comma for second equation. 

In Maple 12.02

Student[Calculus1][FunctionChart](x*exp(1/x));

Student[Calculus1][FunctionChart](x*exp(1/x),x=0..5);

Student[Calculus1][FunctionChart](x*exp(1/x),x=-1..5);

Student[Calculus1][FunctionChart](x*exp(1/x),x=-2..5);

And time just for interest sakes

st := time();
p := Student[Calculus1][FunctionChart](x*exp(1/x)):
time()-st;

                                    0.219

Nice to see a 16.02 update.  I wonder if we will see a 16.03 update before Maple 17?  As we near the end of the Maple 16 lifecycle of improvements I think it best to dig up and add to the Maple 17 wishlist. 

However if there still exists improvements in the works for Maple 16 then one last update fix prior to 17's release I'm sure would be much appreciated. 

This is impossible for a single function surface.  Piecewise functions make things un-impossible.

Are we saying we can't create a klein bottle (or boys surface) in Maple without obstructions in the way?