Please post your code in text form.

I see this issue. Seldom use typesetting extended myself. There is a link at the left "Submit Maple Software Change Request" where you may file a report.

I see this issue. Seldom use typesetting extended myself. There is a link at the left "Submit Maple Software Change Request" where you may file a report.

Note that the coefficients of the system of ODEs first posted are not periodic.

I think that there is no generic algorithm to solve analytically such systems of ODEs with any C and D  periodic coefficients. Indeed, the much simpler case of the single ODE Mathieu equation is rather involved.

In any case, shipped Maple does not include a Fourier series package. There is some contributed package though.

Note that the coefficients of the system of ODEs first posted are not periodic.

I think that there is no generic algorithm to solve analytically such systems of ODEs with any C and D  periodic coefficients. Indeed, the much simpler case of the single ODE Mathieu equation is rather involved.

In any case, shipped Maple does not include a Fourier series package. There is some contributed package though.

I use wireshark to capture loopback.

I use wireshark to capture loopback.

Maple 13, Standard worksheet mode, 1D input, under Win XP SP2. It is fully reproducible here. I get a crash even with (1)/(1).

A milder crash occurs also with (1)*(1): the connection with  the kernel is lost but after producing the output. Ie I can save the Standard worksheet and the result 5 appears in the output when loading again.

No such crash with e.g. sin((1))/(1).

This crash is also reproducible in Maple 13.

In document mode I get:

interface(displayprecision = 10);
                                     -1
evalf(10.5, 10);
                                    10.5000000000
evalf[10](10.5);
                                    10.5000000000

But I do not use this mode either...

In document mode I get:

interface(displayprecision = 10);
                                     -1
evalf(10.5, 10);
                                    10.5000000000
evalf[10](10.5);
                                    10.5000000000

But I do not use this mode either...

With Tools > Options > Precision >  Round screen display to 10 decimal places, I get:

evalf(10.5,10);
                10.5000000000

Instead, this Standard interface variable can also set with the same effect:

interface(displayprecision=10);

With Tools > Options > Precision >  Round screen display to 10 decimal places, I get:

evalf(10.5,10);
                10.5000000000

Instead, this Standard interface variable can also set with the same effect:

interface(displayprecision=10);

When using decimal comma the middle point looks fine and there is no need for brackets: 100,15^.1,500000000ⁿ.

Nevertheless, I think that the prettyprinting should be more customizable.

Inserting multiplication signs in your handwritten system, I get several sets of equations:

eq:={a=b, h=j, c=j, k=g, k*c-j*e=a*l-h*e-b*l+g*c,
 k*a-j*d=a*k-h*d-b*k+g*a,
 -k*b+j*b=-a*j+a*b+b*j+g*f,
 k*g-j*g=a*m-h*g-b*m+g*f,
 g*e=0, g*d=0,g*b=0 ,g*g=0 ,b*l-g*c=-k*c+j*e+a*l+m*e
 ,b*k-g*a=-k*a+j*d+a*k-m*d
 ,-b*j-g*f=-k*f-j*b-a*j+m*b
 ,b*m-g*h=-k*h+j*g+a*m-m*g
 ,a*l-h*e=k*c-j*e+b*l-g*c
 ,a*k-h*d=k*a-j*d+b*k-g*a
 ,-a*j+h*b=k*f+j*b-b*j-g*f
 ,a*m-h*g=k*h-j*g+b*m-g*h}:

solve(eq);
  {a = 0, b = 0, c = j, d = 0, e = 0, f = f, g = 0, h = j, j = j,

        k = 0, l = l, m = m}, {a = 0, b = 0, c = -m, d = 0, e = e,

        f = f, g = 0, h = -m, j = -m, k = 0, l = l, m = m}, {a = 0,

        b = 0, c = 0, d = d, e = e, f = f, g = 0, h = 0, j = 0, k = 0,

        l = l, m = 0}, {a = 0, b = 0, c = m, d = d, e = 0, f = f,

        g = 0, h = m, j = m, k = 0, l = l, m = m}, {a = m, b = m,

        c = m, d = d, e = 0, f = f, g = 0, h = m, j = m, k = 0, l = l,

        m = m}

The last one seems similar to your hand solution.