Calculators Which calculator? Hp 50G vs Ti89 Titanium

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on choosing between the HP 50G and the TI-89 Titanium calculators for advanced math courses. Users highlight the HP's RPN (Reverse Polish Notation) feature, which some find efficient for complex calculations, while others prefer the TI-89 for its user-friendliness and extensive program availability. Many recommend the TI-89 for engineering and upper-level math due to its powerful CAS capabilities and support for various applications. The debate also touches on the learning curve of RPN versus traditional algebraic input, with proponents arguing that RPN aligns better with mathematical thinking. Ultimately, the choice depends on individual needs and preferences for specific functionalities in their studies.
  • #121
aerosmithcoop said:
Which is better for physics i really don't care that RPN is a feature (no offense i do like it its just not that important to me) all i care about is the mathematical features
so which is better for physics (obviously including trig)and algebra
hope i get a response

Go for the cheapest one.
 
Computer science news on Phys.org
  • #122
aerosmithcoop said:
Which is better for physics i really don't care that RPN is a feature (no offense i do like it its just not that important to me) all i care about is the mathematical features
so which is better for physics (obviously including trig)and algebra
hope i get a response

I would go for the HP. In physics you often have to program your own user functions and that's far easier with the HP calculator.
 
  • #123
some questions concerning the hp or ti.

Hello,
I am looking at upgrading my calculator (currently have ti-85...yes, I know it is old) and have some questions hopefully someone can answer concerning the comparisions. (1) It seems I purchased my 85 right before ti came out with the 86 etc. so I was wondering how long the ti-89titanium and hp 50G have been out and if an updated model is in the works in the near future and might be worth a short wait? (2) I really like having the F or Menu keys and the way they are incorporated in the 85 and was wondering if the 89T and the HP50G kind of follow the same setup? I noticed both key pads have this but have never had the opportunity to try either out very much? This brings up another question, it seems the 85/86 keypad or menus do not follow the 84 etc. very closely...or in my experience when trying to help others with these models. Does the 89 keypad/layout follow either or is it a new approach all together? (3) I am considering going after a MS in EE so the idea of having laplace transforms/fourier transforms/FFT's/DFFT's etc. built into a calculator seems great so any thoughts/opinions on this in either calculator? (4) I've written several programs over the years for my 85 and have lost them when changing the AAA batteries and not realizing the small backup battery needed replacing too. I noticed the 50G has a memory card slot and am assuming programs, tables, etc. can be saved to this with no memory loss issues? Does the 89 have something similar or memory that doesn't get lost when my memory forgets to change the small backup battery periodically? thanks
 
  • #124
tlee8520 said:
Hello,
I am looking at upgrading my calculator (currently have ti-85...yes, I know it is old) and have some questions hopefully someone can answer concerning the comparisions. (1) It seems I purchased my 85 right before ti came out with the 86 etc. so I was wondering how long the ti-89titanium and hp 50G have been out and if an updated model is in the works in the near future and might be worth a short wait? (2) I really like having the F or Menu keys and the way they are incorporated in the 85 and was wondering if the 89T and the HP50G kind of follow the same setup? I noticed both key pads have this but have never had the opportunity to try either out very much? This brings up another question, it seems the 85/86 keypad or menus do not follow the 84 etc. very closely...or in my experience when trying to help others with these models. Does the 89 keypad/layout follow either or is it a new approach all together? (3) I am considering going after a MS in EE so the idea of having laplace transforms/fourier transforms/FFT's/DFFT's etc. built into a calculator seems great so any thoughts/opinions on this in either calculator? (4) I've written several programs over the years for my 85 and have lost them when changing the AAA batteries and not realizing the small backup battery needed replacing too. I noticed the 50G has a memory card slot and am assuming programs, tables, etc. can be saved to this with no memory loss issues? Does the 89 have something similar or memory that doesn't get lost when my memory forgets to change the small backup battery periodically? thanks

The TI-89 (Ti) came out in 2004, and the HP-50g came out in 2006, I think. Both are incremental upgrades to previous models, so I don't know if you want to consider these two as being completely new. Texas Instruments has already come out with what you might consider a new model, the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TI-Nspire" . HP has no new offerings, and I don't think either company has anything in the pipeline (but I really don't know).

As far as the menu key behavior is concerned, the HP-50g is much closer to what you're familiar with (the TI-89 is completely different). With the 50g, you have the option to change a setting (search for "softmenus") that will go from "drop-down menus" (e.g. what the TI-89 has) to "softmenus" (what the TI-86 has). With the 89, you have to get http://paxm.org/symbulator/download/rpn.html" in order to mimic the menu style of the TI-86, so if you're considering an 89, you might want to factor in the cost of getting a USB cable. As far as the menu structure goes, the TI-89 is, again, very different than the TI-86 (so much so that the HP-50g is more similar to the TI-86 than the TI-89 is, in my opinion). The only way you can access math functions on the 89 is in the drop-down menus ("Algebra" and "Calculus"), and hitting 2ND-5 to bring up the MATH root menu (..or bringing up the catalog as a last resort). These menus behave very much like hierarchical menus, where you have to leave one submenu in order to enter another. If you really need to, you can customize the drop-down menus with an additional custom menu, but the behavior is the same. On the HP-50g, you have keys bound to different submenus (like with the TI-86), so you can flit from menu to menu much faster if you have chosen to use "softmenus" instead of the "drop-down menus."

The HP-50g has Laplace transforms, and the FFT as part of the calculator's ROM. For other things, you're going to have to download something from the internet or roll your own. The TI-89 doesn't include any transforms but you can get them from the internet (e.g. http://www.technicalc.org/bbhatt/", or elsewhere). Again, you'll need a USB cable to be able to get them onto your calculator (for the TI-89 I think they run around $25?.. they're included with the HP-50g). The HP-50g does indeed have an SD card slot that you can use to store any kind of data without worrying about memory loss. I believe it can address upto 1 gig of memory. For the TI-89 you can archive variables (programs, text, etc.) and I think this will move them out of RAM and into the Flash portion of the memory, and they won't be erased once you remove the batteries.

By the way, if you're going to do EE stuff, you may want to look at http://paxm.org/symbulator/download/sq.html".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #125
I really liked the TI-86, a lot. I still have mine, and I think it is one of the best calculators without a CAS.

The HP-50 and TI-89 are both good, capable calculators.

Going by the specs, the HP-50 is far superior, but the reality of the situation is that, for normal operations, they are about the same speed, since the HP-50 uses emulation and clocks-down the processor. Most of the extra hardware features of the HP-50, you are probably not going to put use.

The mathematical functions of the HP-50 also seem superior, but, and I stress this, quite a bit more difficult to use. The TI also has the advantage of a huge library of user functions and programs, much bigger than the HP. Also, many programs for the HP are implemented as libraries, which cannot be loaded from the SD card, so some of the storage advantage is negated.

My general impression is that, if you are going to use the calculator for a long time for advanced mathematics and science, are willing to put a lot of time into learning to use the calculator, and are pretty efficient with computer-science, then the HP-50 is probably your best bet, because it is more powerful.

If you are looking to use it for a few classes and not put too much time into learning how to use the calculator, then the TI-89, with its pull-down menus and easy to use functions is better.
 
  • #126
Yeah, I like to think of it as the same kind of comparison as *nix vs. Windows: bigger learning curve and bigger payoff vs. easy to use and quick to learn.
 
  • #127
From what I read, the Derive CAS software that the TI is based on is pretty weak. The CAS software that the HP is based on is a little better (it can solve a few more integrals, for instance). Neither of them are stellar CAS's like Mathematica. The TI has a lot of non math/science programs, but I want a calculator to do calculations, not to play games or manage my schedule, and the HP seems to have the advantage when it comes down to the meat and potatoes of what a calculator was designed to do.

But neither of these "high end" calculators are really all that great when you think about what computers are capable of (and what a handheld calculator could be capable of) today.
 
  • #128
Hmmm, Mathematica is also very slow compared to running a custom C++ program. The only reason why you want to use Mathematica is because the high level language allows you to save an enormous amount or programming time.

Trying to run Mathematica on a hand held computer would be a nightmare. You would be far better of using a handheld with internet access and then using VCN to remotely access your PC at the office or home.
 
  • #129
Count Iblis said:
Hmmm, Mathematica is also very slow compared to running a custom C++ program. The only reason why you want to use Mathematica is because the high level language allows you to save an enormous amount or programming time.

Trying to run Mathematica on a hand held computer would be a nightmare. You would be far better of using a handheld with internet access and then using VCN to remotely access your PC at the office or home.

The Mathematica kernel was originally designed to run on some pretty weak PC's, much weaker than the chips that are available in today's handheld PC's.

If I remember, the ARM processor in the HP-50 is capable of running at something like 150 Mhz. Mathematica 4.0 ran fairly well on x86 chips with much slower clock speeds, and there are cheap, small chips capable of running at much higher clock speeds than that.

I guess my point was, for a few hundred dollars, with today's technology and chip prices, someone could make a calculator with a high resolution color screen, lithium ion batter, and a fast enough processor and sufficient ram to run a linux micro-kernel and some serious mathematical and scientific software. Of course, a $500 laptop would be maybe twice as much (and many times more powerful), but with the number of handheld calculators being bought every year, I would think that there would at least be some market for such a device.
 
  • #130
I've been using HP calculators for 15 years (wow...). I first learned RPN on a friend's HP calculator in 6th grade, and now I pretty much think in RPN. I find ordinary calculators (especially TI models) extremely cumbersome to use.

The main benefit of HP calculators to me, however, was not the RPN, but the stack. When you enter data on an HP calculator, it gets popped onto a stack; and when that data is used as the argument to some function, it is popped off the stack (and whatever data the function returns is popped onto the stack again). The display shows the top 4-5 levels of the stack, so you can see what you have previously entered, and it all flows rather nicely. For example, suppose you want to calculate 5\cdot(23+17) - 2\cdot(14-8). You don't have to do any "RPN rearranging" in your head; just use the stack:

First enter 5. The screen shows:

Code: 
4.    
3.    
2.    
1.    5

Now enter 23:

Code: 
4.    
3.    
2.    5
1.    23

Then 17:

Code: 
4.    
3.    5
2.    23
1.    17

Now hit '+':

Code: 
4.    
3.    
2.    5
1.    40

Now hit '*':

Code: 
4.    
3.    
2.    
1.    200

Then enter 2:

Code: 
4.    
3.    
2.    200
1.    2

Enter 14:

Code: 
4.    
3.    200
2.    2
1.    14

Enter 8:

Code: 
4.    200
3.    2
2.    14
1.    8

Hit '-':

Code: 
4.    
3.    200
2.    2
1.    6

Hit '*':

Code: 
4.    
3.    
2.    200
1.    12

Hit '-':

Code: 
4.    
3.    
2.    
1.    188

Done. Once you get the hang of it, a calculation like that takes only a few seconds. Of course, you have to remember what you were doing. But you do save yourself from having to type any parentheses, so this can be very quick. If you were unsure of yourself, you could always type

Code: 
4.    
3.    
2.    
1.    '5*(23+17)-2*(14-8)'

And hit either "EVAL" or "->NUM" (but it does actually take longer to write the formula out this way). So in reality, HP gives you the best of both worlds: RPN and algebraic input. But either way, all your prior results stay on the stack, and this is the real power and efficiency of HP calculators. (Yes, I know that TI calculators also give you a way to refer to prior results, but it requires typing.)

HP also has graphical equation display, and an equation input tool that let's you enter and view things like

\int_a^b f(x)\,dx = \frac{1}{4!}\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\frac{x^k}{7^x}

in all their glory. So do TI calculators, so that's not a huge difference.


Honestly, however, I hardly ever find myself using a calculator at all anymore. I generally either work things out on paper, or turn to Maple or Excel when things get more involved.
 
  • #132
Where can I get a rom to use for emulation of the hp 50g with emu48? Do I have to use the OS files on HPs website? If so, what do I do to produce a rom?
 
  • #133
Taking the now infamous equation, '-2^4', the minus sign at the beginning is monadic and must mean that the numeral 2 is negative. The HP calculators have, for as long as I can remember (35 years or more), used the +/- key to negate a number. The - key is an operator and is diadic (that is it needs two numbers).
Going further, all numbers (both integer and real) exist on infinite continua. As such all positive numbers should be prefixed by the monadic + sign, so the above equation should be rewritten as '-2^+4'. I have just checked this on my 50g and both this and '-2^4' give an incorrect answer of -16. If you write '(-2)^4' or '(-2)^+4)' you get the correct answer of 16 (this is the same in both Algorithmic mode and RPN writing the equations within single quote marks and pressing EVAL).
To me the beauty of RPN is that when you evaluate the equation -2 4 ^ is that there is no confusion in that -2 is a negative number and you can see it on the stack as such, then you see 4 on the stack and then you apply the diadic ^ operator and get the correct answer.
I'm not really too sure what to make of all this. Is the way the equation is interpreted correct or not.
As a final thought try writing the quation '4-2<+/->' and it will change to '4+2' before you evaluate it.
But as I said in my origional post I have been using RPN for 35 years.

I like the 50g because it is a very good list processor (one does this a lot in (Chemical) engineering) and not just an equation solver which the TI 89 seems to be. You have to look at the HP 49 Advanced User Guide to find out just how good it is at this.
 
  • #134
The result of '-2^4' in algebraic notation is utterly dependent on the precedence and associativity of the system evaluating it. Without all the parenthesis needed to completely disambiguate the expression the result can be either -16 or +16. Neither result is right nor wrong.

Most calculators, like most programming languages, use very similar definitions for their precedence and associativity rules, but (and this is a big but) most of them differ in minor ways that only become apparent when somebody gets a result that is "incorrect". Stating that -16 is incorrect (or vice versa) is equivalent to stating that driving on the left side of the road in the UK is wrong (or the opposite in the US).

There is no reason to assume an algebraic expression not explicitly parenthesized should evaluate equally in two different systems, be it calculators or programming languages (as any programmer worth its salt already knows).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations#Mathematical_precedence (take a look at note #1 especially).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associativity#Non-associativity

For the best presentation of the problem that I have found yet please visit:
http://www.macnauchtan.com/pub/precedence.html"

Lotus 1-2-3 gives -16 while Excel claims the answer to be 16. Which is right?
Therein lies the beauty of RPL and prefix/postfix languages.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #135
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #136
Technically, a computer system can evaluate the order of operations in any manner it sees fit, but I think that -2^2=-4 is a more true to the algebraic and computational order of operations.

Order of operations dictates that exponents are evaluated before sums and differences in algrebra, and most computer systems respect this.

For instance, when I plug -2^2 into my HP-50, my TI-86, and Mathematica, they all give me -4. This answer is the most consistent with the order of operations.
 
  • #137
The HP 50G runs RPN but you can also turn it off.

RPN is natural and flows with the way we think.

If you had to solve 4(2+3)= on the TI you must enter the program with the () and that is not how you do it in your head.

If you were to solve by band or in your head you would solve 2+3 than multiply by 4 that is exactly how you do it in RPN. RPN follows your normal thought process, the TI process takes you away from the normal thought process.

Those who use RPN swear by it because it makes sense to do math that way. Those who use TI swear by it because they don't understand RPN.

Once you try and get used to RPN you won't want to do it the other way.
 
  • #138
I can only concurr with jaschandler. The older HP calculators, from the HP35 onwards, had a stack (x, y, z and t) and the machines only displayed the 'x' and the user had to remember what was in the 'y, z and t'. This made life very confusing. Did pressing 'ClX' just clear the x display to zero or did it drop the stack? With the advent of multi line displays in the HP 48 series one could see what was happening to the stack and there was no confusion possible.
The HP50g is a natural progrssion with its ability to mix and match the stack with numbers and algebraics. Simple mathematics is still simple mathematics as jaschandler describes.
But HP have added so much more with list processing.
Just try {1 2 3 4} 2 * and you will get the answer {2 4 6 8}.
 
  • #139
I've been thinking for a while about getting a new calculator. I've used HPs for over 30 years, starting with (I think) an HP-21 about the time I started graduate school, and continuing with a couple of HP-11C's. I still use the second 11C at home. So RPN input feels natural to me. However, all my students use TIs because our math department favors them, so that's what I use at work. I had a TI-83 Plus but I lost it, so I'm back to an ancient TI-81 right now.

I'll probably end up getting both a TI-84 Plus or a TI-89 Titanium (so I can help students use theirs), and an HP-50g because in my heart I really prefer HP. :!)
 
Last edited:
  • #140
Hmmm... the http://h20000.www2.hp.com/bizsupport/TechSupport/SoftwareDescription.jsp?lang=en&cc=us&prodTypeId=215348&prodSeriesId=3235173&prodNameId=3235174&swEnvOID=228&swLang=8&mode=2&taskId=135&swItem=ca-14082-8 doesn't seem to be available for Mac OS X, only for various flavors of Windows. Is this likely to be a serious limitation for a Mac user like me?

At some point I'll probably install Windows on my new Mac Pro anyway, but I'd rather not have to do it just for my calculator.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #141
An I the only one who is upset that HP still has not supplies a 64 bit windows driver for its 50g? If all you have is XP64 or Vista 64, you are not going to be able to connect it with the USB cable until HP releases the appropriate drivers.

Vista has been out for some time now and it is ridiculous that the proper driver is not available for this calculator.

The only upside is that the calculator comes with an SD card reader, so you can use that to transfer files.
 
  • #142
I use SD cards in my camera, and I always transfer pictures to my computer using a card reader. So if using a card to move stuff between the 50g and my Mac accomplishes the same thing that the software would, that's fine with me.
 
  • #143
I feel compelled to ask this in response to the -2^4 question...If -2^4=-16 than is it safe to say that the square root of -1 = -1? example...-1^.5= -1 x 1^.5? Wow that's against everything that I've learned. Interesting though. I understand what the argument is but I would say that if -2 is a quantity than you wouldn't factor it before doing the exponent. So (-2)^4...Without the Syntax error...
 
  • #144
I feel compelled to ask this in response to the -2^4 question...If -2^4=-16 than is it safe to say that the square root of -1 = -1? example...-1^.5= -1 x 1^.5? Wow that's against everything that I've learned. Interesting though. I understand what the argument is but I would say that if -2 is a quantity than you wouldn't factor it before doing the exponent. So (-2)^4...Without the Syntax error..."

-1^0.5 is not the square root of -1. The square root of -1=(-1)^0.5 and not -1^0.5 because -1^0.5 is not equal to (-1)^0.5. The square root of -1 or the square root of negative one means that we are taking the term negative one and finding the square root of that number. -1^0.5 means we are taking the square root of 1 and then taking the negative of that number.
 
  • #145
HP.

I have never owned or tried a TI.

I am a bit of a different user. I write custom RPN programs to determine all kinds of trig based lengths for framing wooden structures.

RPN and the stack have provided a good living for me and my family...being a techno-framer keeps me a cut above the rest.

HP just needs to offer a job-site friendly armored case, or ruggedized version...that would be a 10 out of 10 for sure.
 
  • #146
After reading this thread I decided to get a 50g but I have one last question in mind before I go out and buy the most important tool of my life.
My question is can the 50g solve equations in terms of variables? Does it show step by step solution like 49g?
 
  • #147
HP calculators and RPN

I live in Bangladesh. Casio runs a monopoly business here. Everyone uses Casio. I WAS a Casio fan till yesterday.
I got a HP 32sII from my uncle two years ago, unfortunately he forgot to pack the manual when he came(he lives in US). So without the manual (I didnt have net connection, so couldn't download it) I got frustrated after trying to do arithmatic in algebric input system (32 + 12) and put it in my desk drawer. Even after getting the hard copy of the manual 2-3 months later I didnt bother to try it again. Today I just realized that it was one of the worst thing I ever did. Thanks to all of you HP and RPN supporters of this thread I got interested in RPN and took my 32sII out. After trying it for a few hours (with the help of the manual) I totally lost interest in Casio and any other non-RPN calcs.
I am never picking up my Casios again.
If I had known how to use RPN during my O levels I could have finished my math exams at least half an hour earlier.
HP calcs arent available here. Hell, I will be laughed at if I said HP makes calculators at the electronics shop.
I am going to ask my uncle to buy a 50g for me.
He is coming in a month or so.
I just can't wait to get my hands at a HP 50g.
 
  • #148


Shajnush Amir said:
I live in Bangladesh. Casio runs a monopoly business here. Everyone uses Casio. I WAS a Casio fan till yesterday.
I got a HP 32sII from my uncle two years ago, unfortunately he forgot to pack the manual when he came(he lives in US). So without the manual (I didnt have net connection, so couldn't download it) I got frustrated after trying to do arithmatic in algebric input system (32 + 12) and put it in my desk drawer. Even after getting the hard copy of the manual 2-3 months later I didnt bother to try it again. Today I just realized that it was one of the worst thing I ever did. Thanks to all of you HP and RPN supporters of this thread I got interested in RPN and took my 32sII out. After trying it for a few hours (with the help of the manual) I totally lost interest in Casio and any other non-RPN calcs.
I am never picking up my Casios again.
If I had known how to use RPN during my O levels I could have finished my math exams at least half an hour earlier.
HP calcs arent available here. Hell, I will be laughed at if I said HP makes calculators at the electronics shop.
I am going to ask my uncle to buy a 50g for me.
He is coming in a month or so.
I just can't wait to get my hands at a HP 50g.

Hi, nice to hear that. Actually, here is the few things you may need to consider when purchasing an HP 50g.
+ You may need a external AC power supply for your HP 50g. You can get one for cheap at hpcalc.org
+ Download the latest ROM from HP website to upgrade the calc
+ Use rechargeable batteries
+ Download additional functions (or write them yourself) to complete its power.
HP 50g can calculate 99999^999 and give your exact result without scientific notation.
 
  • #149
I am going for a B.Sc. in EE.

Is the 50g overkill? Would it be a better investment to purchase a 35s, as I would likely not be able to use a 50g on an exam?

I'd rather become familiar with the device I am actually going to be using. I'd hate to spend $150.00 on something that I won't be able to use on the exams.

-Robert
 
  • #150
The 50g is a very powerful beast, bridging the gap between calculators and computers, although it is still technically a calculator. One simply has to look at the range of software available for it and the 49g+.
Is it suitable for students in an exam situation? In my humble opinion, probably not. If you couple the 50g/49g+ with an SD card you could prepare the answers to all probable questions; so let me qualify my previous statement - from a teacher/examiner perspective no, for a student yes.
(if you look at the contents of my 50g without the SD card it appears a standard machine with no programs/data files. Put the SD card in and there are hundreds of applictions including one to mark and grade my students and detect cheating!)
The other matter to consider is the learning curve - I've had my 50g for nearly three years now and I am still finding new things it can do.
Personally at your level I would use a relatively simple machine, preferably an HP for the RPN which has a large display and an "unlimited" stack (not the old style 4 level stack). I am not so familiar with all HP's models that I can quote model numbers to you.
Regards, Adrian Evans
 

Similar threads

Looking for new HP calculator - 35S or 50g?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
Calculators What makes HP 50G so complicated?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
8K
TI 89 or HP 50g (for programming and more)?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
18K
Calculators Ti-84 Plus C Silver Edition vs Ti-Nspire CX
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
11K
Calculators Graphing Calculator: HP 50g vs TI-89 Titanium
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Calculators RE- TI Nspire CX CAS vs Casio Classpad vs TI 89
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
Calculators HP50g or TI-89 Titanium: Which Calculator is Best for Calculus II?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
9K
Which calculator purely for algebra solver (with quadratics, cubics)
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
9K
Calculators TI-89 Titanium or TI-Nspire CX CAS?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
62K
Calculators Trouble with multivariable limits of integration on Ti89
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K