Calculators Is switching to a Dvorak keyboard configuration worth the time and effort?

[niehls]

Am i the only one that considers the hp calculators way too slow? I have a HP 49G and i love it. Except the fact that i waste minutes just going through the menus. All HP calculators I've tested is slow. (Compared to Texas ti-models at least). For example, exiting from some menu may take up to like 5-10 seconds. Also drawing graphics is really slow. It takes a long time before it even starts drawing. I assume this is due to calculations but why does the ti-calculators perform this task (among others) so much faster?

Don't get me wrong. I love my HP. I just don't like wasting half of my time on the exam on walking through menus.

Does anyone know if the have solved this problem in their 49G+ calculator. I'm thinking about buying one, but i need to know if its as slow as the 49G

Cheers.

 

[dduardo]

Get the TI-89 Titanium. It comes with a 14Mhz Motorola 68k processor and built in usb.

 

[graphic7]

The 49G uses a 9mHz Saturn processor, I believe. I could be wrong about the exact processor speed, but it's based on the HP48G series' CPU, which was 4mHz. I'm a proud owner of a 48GX, myself, and I love them. The TI-83 and 86, et al. all use a Z80 procesor, which is a bit slower than a Saturn, even the 4mhz ones. The 89's, 92's, etc. all use M68000-based processors. These happen to be fairly decent, and range from 8-14mHz depending on your TI model, and are much faster than any Saturn.

The 49G+ uses a 75mHz ARM-based processor, which is much, much faster than the M68k's. At the moment the 49G+ is actually emulating a Saturn. This will soon change when HP finishes rewriting the environment for the 49G+. So, you can even expect much higher speeds than what the 49G+ is currently putting out.

The 49G+ is technically superior at the moment to any TI calculator, not to mention you have a pretty standardized storage media - SmartMedia cards. The new TI-89's top out about 2mb of memory, whereas you could throw a 64mb SmartMedia card into your 49G+. You'll also have USB connectivity.

The 49G+ is cheaper or close to the price of a TI-89 Platinum edition. Not to mention, you won't have a calculator that looks like a toy.

You'll be highly pleased with the 49G+ if you buy one, but I emphasize that you should buy it from HP directly. Retail stores could still have a stock of older HP calculators that had defects. If you buy one directly from HP, these defects will not be present.

Edit: There's away to dub down the accuracy of the plotting application on HP calculators. I've done it on my 48GX, however, I have long forgotten how to do it. It does exist, so it shouldn't he hard to find it in the manual or any online documentation. You'll get much better performance out of it; similar to a TI-83 and the accuracy loss is hardly noticeable.

 

[franznietzsche]

Get the TI-89 Titanium. It comes with a 14Mhz Motorola 68k processor and built in usb.

I WANT!

What's the price on that?

(As if the 89 itself isn't good enough, geek that i am, have to upgrade...)

 

[The_Professional]

Get the TI-89 Titanium. It comes with a 14Mhz Motorola 68k processor and built in usb.

But does it run Linux?

 

[franznietzsche]

But does it run Linux?

OOOOHHH!

New project, let's see who can run linux on their TI-89 titanium first!

 

[chroot]

I'm surprised TI and HP haven't bit the bullet and put out an emulated calculator program for Palm or WinCE devices.

- Warren

 

[graphic7]

OOOOHHH!

New project, let's see who can run linux on their TI-89 titanium first!

The HP49G+ would be much more capable of running Linux. I'm not sure if you can actually use Linux on it at the moment, but it is a 75mHz 32-bit ARM-based processor, which is far superior to that of a 14mHz M68K. Not to mention you have expandability - something the TI-89 does not have. How do you plan on booting anything other than the kernel with 2mb of flash memory?

You could actually have a small and quite usable Linux distribution on a 128mb flash card.

 

[graphic7]

I'm surprised TI and HP haven't bit the bullet and put out an emulated calculator program for Palm or WinCE devices.

- Warren

Emu48 and the TI emulator (Virtual something (?)), both have Windows CE versions.

Your point is valid, though. Both companies do produce inexpensive handheld devices, and they could do away with their hardware divisions that produce the calculator hardware. Emulating the calculators would in no way make the calculator lose it's qualities that it had beforehand. You'd still be able to use RPN on an emulated HP49G+. :!)

 

[Integral]

I haven't had a new HP for nearly 20yrs ( I still have my 28c). Do the new ones still use RPN? (Non RPN calculator = toy)

 

[graphic7]

I haven't had a new HP for nearly 20yrs ( I still have my 28c). Do the new ones still use RPN? (Non RPN calculator = toy)

Amen!

HP still offers RPN on the HP49 series (graphing calculators) and on the HP33 series (scientific calculators). They've put algebraic modes on most of them. Even my 32SII and 48GX have algebraic modes, however, RPN is still the primary mode. HP does have a few series of calculators where algebraic mode is the only mode supported.

The copyright on my 48GX is 1992, and the copyright on my 32SII is 1989. The features of the 48GX were not duplicated until HP created the TI-92 which was many years later. As for my 32SII, no other scientific calculator can compare to it's usability and form.

Edit: An interesting fact is that HP calculators still sell for higher dollar values on Ebay than their original retail values. I had to pay $150 for my 48GX last year, and it's worth every penny. It's difficult to find a perfect condition 48GX (discontinued) like mine was, for under $200, now. The 32SII (discontinued, as well) is generating values of $150+, as well. Keep in mind, that the 32SII sold for $75 at it's high point. Show me a TI that will sell higher used than it's original retail value.

 

[imabug]

The HP 49G+ actually isn't made by HP, but by an OEM. From The Museum of HP Calculators:

HP 49G+
A replacement for the HP-49G reimplemented by an OEM (Kinpo). An ARM processor replaced the HP Saturn processor used in the original HP-49G. Hard plastic keys replaced the rubber keys of the HP-49G. Also added USB and expansion via SD cards. Infrared, which was dropped from the HP-49G, returned to the G+. Introduced in 2003.

I seem to recall reading somewhere a while ago that while the 49G+ used an ARM processor, it still used the original HP calculator OS written for the Saturn chip used in the HP48 series and ran in an emulation mode on the ARM processor. This is only a vague recollection though and I'm not positive this is true.

 

[franznietzsche]

The HP49G+ would be much more capable of running Linux. I'm not sure if you can actually use Linux on it at the moment, but it is a 75mHz 32-bit ARM-based processor, which is far superior to that of a 14mHz M68K. Not to mention you have expandability - something the TI-89 does not have. How do you plan on booting anything other than the kernel with 2mb of flash memory?

You could actually have a small and quite usable Linux distribution on a 128mb flash card.

Yeah, but the motorola processor is known to be able to run the kernel. What about the HPs? if you could set it up to run off a usb drive plugged in (even though i couldn't even get my computer to boot from, bios didn't want to.) then you could run something akin to a full DSL or Slax distribution.

Being the geek that i am, i think the whole idea just oozes awesomeness.

 

[JasonRox]

I got a POCKET PC! HAHA!

312mhz 32 ram

 

[franznietzsche]

I got a POCKET PC! HAHA!

312mhz 32 ram

How much did that cost you?

 

[Curious3141]

I have an old HP-42S with the RPN (won it in a Tech competition). Pity, the LCD is destroyed from age or heat, who knows ? But I can't get a replacement for it because HP stopped supporting the model long ago.

Still works, but it's difficult to see the display. Can anyone recommend me a good replacement that can do everything this model can plus more ? I love the way this calc handles complex numbers as if they were no different from reals, a new model must have that robustness.

 

[franznietzsche]

I have an old HP-42S with the RPN (won it in a Tech competition). Pity, the LCD is destroyed from age or heat, who knows ? But I can't get a replacement for it because HP stopped supporting the model long ago.

Still works, but it's difficult to see the display. Can anyone recommend me a good replacement that can do everything this model can plus more ? I love the way this calc handles complex numbers as if they were no different from reals, a new model must have that robustness.

THe TI-89s ad HP4-49Gs are both capable of that.

 

[Curious3141]

THe TI-89s ad HP4-49Gs are both capable of that.

Thanks, I'll look into those.

 

[graphic7]

Thanks, I'll look into those.

If you're wanting a scientific calculator forget about the HP49G+ and 89, those are bloated, large machines. Plus on the 89, you don't have RPN. What you're wanting is the HP33S, HP's newest scientific calculator. It supports a 4 line stack (like the 32SII models and probably some others), and 2 lines of the stack can be viewed at a time. This enables you to see the whole complex number - the real and the imaginary part. I've used it's prodecessor, the 32SII, and I use it the majority of the time over my 48GX, which is a mammoth of an RPN graphing calculator.

 

[Curious3141]

If you're wanting a scientific calculator forget about the HP49G+ and 89, those are bloated, large machines. Plus on the 89, you don't have RPN. What you're wanting is the HP33S, HP's newest scientific calculator. It supports a 4 line stack (like the 32SII models and probably some others), and 2 lines of the stack can be viewed at a time. This enables you to see the whole complex number - the real and the imaginary part. I've used it's prodecessor, the 32SII, and I use it the majority of the time over my 48GX, which is a mammoth of an RPN graphing calculator.

Wow, thanks ! The HP33S sounds like what I'm looking for. Can it do any graphing at all ? Because the 42S did have plotting functions, albeit rudimentary.

What sort of hole in the pocket am I looking at ?

 

[franznietzsche]

If you're wanting a scientific calculator forget about the HP49G+ and 89, those are bloated, large machines. Plus on the 89, you don't have RPN. What you're wanting is the HP33S, HP's newest scientific calculator. It supports a 4 line stack (like the 32SII models and probably some others), and 2 lines of the stack can be viewed at a time. This enables you to see the whole complex number - the real and the imaginary part. I've used it's prodecessor, the 32SII, and I use it the majority of the time over my 48GX, which is a mammoth of an RPN graphing calculator.

but the 89 does handle complex numbers the way he wanted, RPN or not.

For my own edififcation, RPN?

 

[scarecrow]

Am i the only one that considers the hp calculators way too slow? I have a HP 49G and i love it. Except the fact that i waste minutes just going through the menus. All HP calculators I've tested is slow. (Compared to Texas ti-models at least). For example, exiting from some menu may take up to like 5-10 seconds. Also drawing graphics is really slow. It takes a long time before it even starts drawing. I assume this is due to calculations but why does the ti-calculators perform this task (among others) so much faster?

Don't get me wrong. I love my HP. I just don't like wasting half of my time on the exam on walking through menus.

Does anyone know if the have solved this problem in their 49G+ calculator. I'm thinking about buying one, but i need to know if its as slow as the 49G

Cheers.

Then how can you "love" it if it's giving you a hard time? Seems odd.

 

[graphic7]

Wow, thanks ! The HP33S sounds like what I'm looking for. Can it do any graphing at all ? Because the 42S did have plotting functions, albeit rudimentary.

What sort of hole in the pocket am I looking at ?

The HP33S does not do plotting, hence, `scientific calculator.' If you want to do some plotting, I would suggest you look into the HP49G+.

The 33S retails for about $50, and the 49G+ can be found around $135.

 

[graphic7]

but the 89 does handle complex numbers the way he wanted, RPN or not.

For my own edififcation, RPN?

RPN is an acronym for reverse polish notation. When doing a calculation, say 2 + 2, you would do 2 [ENTER] 2 + on an RPN-based calculator. RPN might seem like a weird way of doing things, but it allows for much faster input and the ellimination of parenthesis. For example,

(2 + 2) ^ ((7 - 4) ^ (1 / 2)) in RPN would be:

2 2 + 7 4 - 1 2 / ^ ^

People buy HP calculators for RPN. This is one of the reasons TIs are despised by people who have used HP RPN calculators, and their poor quality. Not to mention the lack of any standardization, whether it be in their product line, or with other products.

 

[Curious3141]

RPN is an acronym for reverse polish notation. When doing a calculation, say 2 + 2, you would do 2 [ENTER] 2 + on an RPN-based calculator. RPN might seem like a weird way of doing things, but it allows for much faster input and the ellimination of parenthesis. For example,

(2 + 2) ^ ((7 - 4) ^ (1 / 2)) in RPN would be:

2 2 + 7 4 - 1 2 / ^ ^

Just to add on,

RPN is cool because there is no "open bracket", "close bracket", "nested bracket" confusion. And you always see the two operands you are doing the operation on, so there's no ambiguity. For complex operations where the previous result needs to be remembered, the stack does the job, the value is just pushed up in the stack and will be brought down as needed.

 

[graphic7]

Just to add on,

RPN is cool because there is no "open bracket", "close bracket", "nested bracket" confusion. And you always see the two operands you are doing the operation on, so there's no ambiguity. For complex operations where the previous result needs to be remembered, the stack does the job, the value is just pushed up in the stack and will be brought down as needed.

Not to mention that the whole HP calculator environment is based on RPN. The programming language used on HP48's and 49's is a variation of Lisp with RPN. You can also build equations in RPN and do various functions on the equation with RPN, such as integration and differentiation. For example,

\int x^2 dx

In RPN,

x 2 ^ x integrate

Edit: This can only be done on the 49 series, which has a full computer algebra system. The 48 and 32 series requires definite integration. Keep in mind that the copyright date on my 48 is 92' and copyright date for the 32 is 89'. One of the TI's, the TI-81, has a copyright date of 92' and could only graph 4 equations at a time, and had no functions for definite integration. The 48 can graph as many equations as the memory will allow, and can differentiate quite a few functions symbolically. There's many, many features the 48 had that were quite revolutionary. And there's many more features the 49G+ offers over the TI-89.

For example,

\int_5^9 x^2 dx

In RPN,

5 9 x 2 ^ x integrate

The HP49 series also has an equation builder like no other I have seen. You can highlight a section of an equation, and apply an operation to it. It's very fast when you're wanting to do lots of nested stuff, and not bother with either Algebra or RPN input. For myself, however, I've become fairly accustom with the arguments and their order that various functions require.

 

[franznietzsche]

Just to add on,

RPN is cool because there is no "open bracket", "close bracket", "nested bracket" confusion. And you always see the two operands you are doing the operation on, so there's no ambiguity. For complex operations where the previous result needs to be remembered, the stack does the job, the value is just pushed up in the stack and will be brought down as needed.

Personnaly, RPN would be a reason not to buy it for me. It may be easier to use the calculator, but i prefer the habit of structuring brackets, because i have to do that anyway when writing programs to solve and equation. I like the 89 because i write in the equation as it looks in paper, and it prints in the same notation.

 

[graphic7]

Personnaly, RPN would be a reason not to buy it for me. It may be easier to use the calculator, but i prefer the habit of structuring brackets, because i have to do that anyway when writing programs to solve and equation. I like the 89 because i write in the equation as it looks in paper, and it prints in the same notation.

As I mentioned in the above post, the 49 series has a very functional equation writer, which the TI one does not compare to. Usage of the equation writer does not require RPN. Also, any equation you enter in RPN, can be displayed with `pretty print.' This is just a simple option that can be enabled.

 

[franznietzsche]

As I mentioned in the above post, the 49 series has a very functional equation writer, which the TI one does not compare to. Usage of the equation writer does not require RPN. Also, any equation you enter in RPN, can be displayed with `pretty print.' This is just a simple option that can be enabled.

Well I'm confused, is RPN the only input style?

 

[graphic7]

Well I'm confused, is RPN the only input style?

Yep. Everything from that point on can be seen in algebraic mode. You never really seen those RPN keystrokes that I showed above on the display - all you see are the results of those keystrokes.

Edit: And no, RPN is not the only input style. Algebraic is an option. Also, the input style does not dictate that the output style must look like.

 

[franznietzsche]

Yep. Everything from that point on can be seen in algebraic mode. You never really seen those RPN keystrokes that I showed above on the display - all you see are the results of those keystrokes.

Edit: And no, RPN is not the only input style. Algebraic is an option. Also, the input style does not dictate that the output style must look like.

i know it doesn't dictate ouput style, simply that after years of using the algebraic style, both on calculators and for writing programs, having to readjust to a new one would be something of annoyance, though not the greatest in the world.

Either way, its somewhat moot, i won't be getting a new calculator for a while, i don't have the $150 to spend.

 

[Integral]

Since the 28c in '87 HPs have had the ability to do algebraic entry if you wish. However if you have some numbers to crunch, there is NOTHING better then RPN, it works, and it works well. I still cannot use a TI for anything other then trivial addition, subtraction etc.

Recently, at work several of us were looking at raw data in a log file, we found the coordinates of 2 points and needed to know the separation. There just happened to be an ancient HP12c laying about (Gee, I wonder why?)* In RPN distance if found by the key sequence

# (enter) # - (enter) * # (enter) # - (enter)* + (Sqrt)

As I pick up the calculator one of my coworkers (who may not understand RPN) said something to the effect of, Put do you know how to use it?) When I had the answer in short order, he shook his head as if to say "Where did that come from")



* I work at HP Corvallis... where the original calculators where built.

 

[graphic7]

* I work at HP Corvallis... where the original calculators where built.

It's quite sad about what happened to Corvallis. I'm proud of my 48GX, for it was one of the last (if not the last) calculators to come from Corvallis.

Edit: As I'm aware of, the 48 series was also heavily developed by the French HP subsidiaries. So, I guess the 48 isn't really, really from Corvallis after all.

Edit again: Erk just remembered that the 49 series was developed by the French. The 48 was indeed from Corvallis.

 

[franznietzsche]

Since the 28c in '87 HPs have had the ability to do algebraic entry if you wish. However if you have some numbers to crunch, there is NOTHING better then RPN, it works, and it works well. I still cannot use a TI for anything other then trivial addition, subtraction etc.

Recently, at work several of us were looking at raw data in a log file, we found the coordinates of 2 points and needed to know the separation. There just happened to be an ancient HP12c laying about (Gee, I wonder why?)* In RPN distance if found by the key sequence

# (enter) # - (enter) * # (enter) # - (enter)* + (Sqrt)

As I pick up the calculator one of my coworkers (who may not understand RPN) said something to the effect of, Put do you know how to use it?) When I had the answer in short order, he shook his head as if to say "Where did that come from")



* I work at HP Corvallis... where the original calculators where built.

if you had told me those keystrokes, even knowing what RPN is, i would i have no idea what you just plugged in.

 

[JasonRox]

By the way, I got my Pocket PC for Christmas.

I haven't put a math program on it, but you get one that is somewhat like Maple, which is awesome.

 

[Integral]

if you had told me those keystrokes, even knowing what RPN is, i would i have no idea what you just plugged in.

# represents a number (ie key in a number, in this case the each # is a different component of the coordinates.

(enter) = hit the enter key
# the next coordinate
- = hit the minus key (this gives the difference of the 2 #s)

(enter) push the result onto the stack

* = hit the multiply key (compute the square)
# (key in another coordinate)
Enter
# (key in another coordinate)
- compute the difference
Enter
* (compute the square)
+
Add em up
(Sqrt) yields the distance.

To use RPN you have to understand the stack, the modern calcs show several levels of the stack on the screen and the only limitation is calculator memory, this is very helpful. Back in the old days (I started with a HP35 in 1973) you only saw the x register and had to keep track of the stack (only 4 levels) for yourself. That can be tricky.

A neat trick for evaluating polynomials on any calculator is attributed to someone called Hooker.

Basicly you factor the polynomial eg,
x^2 + 3x +5 = x(x+3)+5

To evaluate this at x = 4
key:
4
enter
enter
3
+
*
5
+

Can you do it in fewer key strokes on your TI?

 

[franznietzsche]

# represents a number (ie key in a number, in this case the each # is a different component of the coordinates.

(enter) = hit the enter key
# the next coordinate
- = hit the minus key (this gives the difference of the 2 #s)

(enter) push the result onto the stack

* = hit the multiply key (compute the square)
# (key in another coordinate)
Enter
# (key in another coordinate)
- compute the difference
Enter
* (compute the square)
+
Add em up
(Sqrt) yields the distance.

To use RPN you have to understand the stack, the modern calcs show several levels of the stack on the screen and the only limitation is calculator memory, this is very helpful. Back in the old days (I started with a HP35 in 1973) you only saw the x register and had to keep track of the stack (only 4 levels) for yourself. That can be tricky.

A neat trick for evaluating polynomials on any calculator is attributed to someone called Hooker.

Basicly you factor the polynomial eg,
x^2 + 3x +5 = x(x+3)+5

To evaluate this at x = 4
key:
4
enter
enter
3
+
*
5
+

Can you do it in fewer key strokes on your TI?

I read those key strokes, know what the symbols mean, and i cannot possibly get them to make that equation.

I'm just going to stick to algebraic notation. Faster or not, i can read it and understand it much faster.

I get the feeling that RPN is somewhat like Perl: Really easy to use, hard to learn, and so short hand that it can be very difficult to read sometimes.

 

[Integral]

That is pretty much correct, it is not for display it is for calculating. When all that matters is that you get the correct number. Every time I pick up a TI am having to get pencil and paper to write down intermediate results, With RPN I just push them onto the stack. I have never really learned to use a calculator with parens. Like you I just don't care to switch. Same reason I still use a QWERTY keyboard.

Now a days I rarly use a handheld, I just pop open Excel, but most of my computing is done near a computer.

 

[franznietzsche]

That is pretty much correct, it is not for display it is for calculating. When all that matters is that you get the correct number. Every time I pick up a TI am having to get pencil and paper to write down intermediate results, With RPN I just push them onto the stack. I have never really learned to use a calculator with parens. Like you I just don't care to switch. Same reason I still use a QWERTY keyboard.

Now a days I rarly use a handheld, I just pop open Excel, but most of my computing is done near a computer.

doesn't work like that on the 89. You just push the up button, highlight the result you want and press enter to insert it wherever your cursor last was. And you can pick from up to the last 99 results.

Its also very easy if you make a mistake entering to tell exactly what it is. to fix it, you just cycle up through entries (entries and results are in the same list, alternating so you get entry1, one the right of the screen at the bottom, answer 1 to the left of it, entry 2 right above... You just cycle up, select then entry, press enter, fix the syntax and hit enter gain to recalculate.

And I've never even seen anything other than a QWERTY keyboard. (well, the split keyboards, but those are still QWERTY, and i don't like them because of the way i type). I've heard of a Dvorak keyboard, but never seen one.

 

[Integral]

doesn't work like that on the 89. You just push the up button, highlight the result you want and press enter to insert it wherever your cursor last was. And you can pick from up to the last 99 results.

Its also very easy if you make a mistake entering to tell exactly what it is. to fix it, you just cycle up through entries (entries and results are in the same list, alternating so you get entry1, one the right of the screen at the bottom, answer 1 to the left of it, entry 2 right above... You just cycle up, select then entry, press enter, fix the syntax and hit enter gain to recalculate.

And I've never even seen anything other than a QWERTY keyboard. (well, the split keyboards, but those are still QWERTY, and i don't like them because of the way i type). I've heard of a Dvorak keyboard, but never seen one.

You can flip a software switch and turn your keyboard into a Dvorak configuration... If you don't move the key caps to match, it makes a great way to protect your computer from non knowing users.. better then any pass word! The beauty of the Dvorak is that it was designed for effecient keying. While the QWERTY was designed to slow you down.

BUT... you have to learn to type all over again!

 

[franznietzsche]

You can flip a software switch and turn your keyboard into a Dvorak configuration... If you don't move the key caps to match, it makes a great way to protect your computer from non knowing users.. better then any pass word! The beauty of the Dvorak is that it was designed for effecient keying. While the QWERTY was designed to slow you down.

BUT... you have to learn to type all over again!

i type plenty fast(faster than i can forumlate my sentences in my head) on a qwerty, in the dark, with my eyes closed, with no increase in typos, changing would then take me another 10 years to get as good at it. Absolutely no reason to change.