Slashdot Mirror
New High-End HP Calculator?
mschaef writes "There's a pretty convincing looking story over on hpcalc.org describing a new high-end HP calculator. The bottom line: 75MHz ARM9, USB Port, IrDA compatibility, 128x80 display, and a slot for SD cards. It also looks like the same basic software is running, either ported or via emulation of the venerable Saturn (HP-propriatary) CPU. The full story is over at HPcalc.org. It's good to see HP back in the game (hopefully) like this."
Great, but can I treat it like a hammer, and still have it work? You know, grab it, punch out a few calculations, and toss it aside without much care where it lands.
With PDAs becoming faster and more capable, is there still a market for plane calculators? Palm (and others) must have tons of (free) software to do the same with your PDA.
Is it time to go to this one yet?
No... I'm still doing fine with my old 28S
Help find a cure for Gidget.
That is still the ultimate "nerd" calculator. Came in a zipper pouch, had a slot for expansion cards, and like all decent calculators worth their circuits, used Reverse Polish Notation.
I remember many an hour wasted in class playing Columns or Arkanoid or Crazy Cars.
Before there was Palm Pilot for looking like you were doing work, there was the HP48GX!
MMORPG fan-boy? Prove your worth
I'll be much happier when they add a CF slot [even better if it replaces the SD slot.]
Use ISO 8601 dates [YYYY-MM-DD]
...only builds better idiots. I almost fell out of my chair three weeks ago when my professor said we are not allowed to use calculators in his Calculus II class.
And while I would not exactly say I am doing good in his class at this point, I am learning and just plain realizing things that I should have learned eons ago. The problem was that it was always more convenient to mash the keys on a calculator than to just think.
... at least until some vendor provides mathematical sofware for the PDA.
The software in todays calculators are capable of pretty advanced mathematical opererations, including advanced calculus, matix operations, statisics and complex math. Until sombody creates an equally good mathematics software suit for PDA's these things will still be around.
Another thing is QA. How are we to be sure that some program we downloaded to our PDA does the calculations correctly. When you buy an advanced calculator you can be pretty confident that the different mathematical functions has been thoroughly tested. Since the key sellingpoint of a calculator is the ability to, well, calculate, the vendor has probably gone to some effort to ensure that it is infact capable of doing that correctly.
Scitne aliquis remedium potimum crapulae?
The only thing that's successfully competed with TI calculators has been computer algebra systems (you can get a good, cheap CAS program like Derive -- another TI product, by the way -- for $99 for the student version and $199 for the professional version) and PDA scientific calculator programs. Existing hardware and software is more flexible and less expensive than this new HP. So if this isn't intended for the student market, I wonder who it is intended for, and if it'll actually sell once it's out.
I have a Palm that can do HP48 emulation (to some degree). It also has its own custom RPN calculator.
Can't touch my HP48GX - You can emulate buttons in software all you want, it will never compare to the nice buttons of the 48.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
How many points of similarity are there if you compare your IBM-Compatible keyboard to your Mac-keyboard, and what meaningful conclusions can be drawn from that?
I covetted my 48G in high school. The ability to store data, make simple programs, RPN, and the equation/constant library were powerful tools. Everybody else used TIs. In college, I convinced a EE buddy to buy a HP48, and he was much happier with this choice.
They announced the 49G when I was in m last year of college. I was excited. The 48G with a CAS! Instead, what a disappointment! Stiff keys, constant need to upgrade the software to fix bugs (through a cable I had to jury rig from an old serial mouse cable, because it didn't come with one), no equation library, and the frequent pauses in the software in the middle of simple calculations. And the OS, especially the way the memory was handled, was cumbersome and confusing. Same screen and same slow processor. Not a purchase decision I'm proud of.
Given their recent history, I have a lot of reservations about the quality of this product, and doubts that they will make any inroads into the education market. Once again the screen and processor seem to be stuck in the past.
HPs used to be THE calculator for engineers. I'll still use my 49G for classes where computers are not alowed, but for everything else, I prefer MATLAB. Although it is a lot more expensive, MATLAB, MathCAD or Mathematica on a small laptop seems to me like the ideal tool for the modern engineer.
The number one reason that a PDA won't replace a calculator is that a touchscreen is a piss-poor substitute for real buttons with travel and tactile feedback ("click", but that doesn't sound as high-tech). I have a Handspring Visor and have downloaded and used multiple calculator apps on it. Some of them are damned good, but I always turn to my trusty HP 32SII for anything more than a handful of calculations.
HP needs to just call it quits and make a decent graphing program (or official hp emulator) for PPCs and sell it for a reasonable price (say, $49.95). Heck of a lot cheaper/easier/more profitable than producing hardware, just ask Sega.
my karma will be here long after I'm gone
What's wrong with PocketPC? I actually tried using one, for a calculator as well as in general, and the answer is that a lot is wrong. The big issue is, of course, no keypad. Fast, efficiant data entry is impossible on the very tiny PPC screen tapping with a stylus. A calculator that takes two hands and visual focus on the screen (instead of the information you are entering) to use is virtually useless for many applications.
The PPC also has issues of reliability with fairly delicate hardware contrasted with much tougher (mainly due to simplicity) calculators. The calc is instant on, and never requires closing apps to free enough memory or even the 3 seconds to switch to the calculator app. Battery life is another issue. Most PPCs will only give you around 4 hours of heavy use, and with the models I have been issued can be an optomistic estimate. They also require frequent charging. When you use a calc a lot, you can't wait a few hours for charging after you've been using it a while.
For a person who uses a calculator a couple of times a month, there are excellant emulators on the PPC (and one on PalmOS, where someone could get a faster seeming, sturdier device with much longer battery life to run it) that could substitute. For anyone who uses a calculator for serious work in school or in their job, it just isn't up to the job.
Oh, and it is profitable. The HP12C is the standard calculator in the financial industry (though TI is making inroads, finally), sells for $70, and the design hasn't changed since 1981. They make stacks of money off that one. Calculator hardware can be profitable, it just has to be the perfect tool for the job.
Well I'm the doctor and I say you're dead, so shut up and take it like a man!
Having attended (and completed) an engineering college, TI vs. HP was a topic of moderately fierce debate (akin to VI vs. Emacs). Overall, mechanical engineering students preferred TI while Electrical and Computer Engineering students preferred HP. I think a lot of it had to do with the HP's great interface for handling complex numbers (which Electrical/Computer Engineering students need to do lots of), but the HP's had much more of a learning curve. You had to learn how to 'think' in HP, which was not always comfortable at first, but I would stack up my ability to crunch through calculations with an HP to anyone with a TI.
VI vs. Emacs probably isn't a fair comparison. It's more like VI vs. MS Notepad. Ever try to convince a Windows diehard why VI is better than notepad? That's what it's like trying to convert at TI user to HP.
char *mySig;
As a mathematician, "real" math most certainly requires a fantastic calculator. For some examples:
1) Numerical Analysis
2) Differential Equations
3) Linear Algebra Systems
4) Discrete Mathematical Systems
5) Finite Analysis
6) Probability
7) Statistics
And a hundred more "real" mathematical systems which require a calculator. If you refer to "real" math as symbolic only, which is my passion in life, then no, you don't use a normal calculator. But, the use of a symbolically solving calculator can prove to be invaluable in an almost infinite number of ways.
The 48/49 series and their predecessors all the way back to the 28C and 18C use what's called RPL, informally referred to (but not officially) as Reverse Polish Lisp. It's a bit different from old style RPN such as in the 35 through the 41, in that the stack height varies, from zero levels (empty stack) to as many levels as needed and as memory will hold. Which one is "right" depends upon what you're trying to do. Old timers tend to like the old style. There's an exception: the 42S was written in RPL but emulates old style RPN. For those preferring the latter, the 33S, which is the successor to the 32S II, should nicely fill the need.
why does a calculator need a 75MHz processor.
Probably because it is going to run an emulation of another processor.