It definitely was a bug but might not be anymore. I'd agree, if the plan was to live within the functionality No letters anywhere. I was thinking more along the lines of what a repurposing project could do with a 14-segment LCD or a dot-matrix LCD with the required supporting hardware installed in a Voyager package. Why can't I enter a new label here? It was a missed opportunity that was just a ROM roll away from being a very, very good calculator. IMHO the 15c takes the :). The 35s is a useful calculator, just disappointing compared to the quality expected from HP. In today's world, the presence of the HP-50G keeps the 35S at a mid-level. I manually confirmed all the bugs except the first one when the list was compiled and amended soon after the release of the 35S. 15c - Ease of use for everyday keyboard calculations, classic RPN programing paradigm for true HP aficionados, bug-free. In my opinion, the programming capabilities of the 35s are superior to the 15c. That all said, I'd be surprised if there weren't numeric issues in the complex functions. Either the 41 or the rest, both have normal and inverse normal distributions. True, but advertising hyperbole doesn't make it so. However, the 35s won't replace my day-to-day calculator, which is a 19-year-old HP-42S. In our modern world, why the hell would anyone want to start out new with something like that?!! I have not extensively tested these functions, just a few random points. (Dunno about the LE). Can someone else please confirm this and I'll add a note saying bug fixed in recent versions. There may be a difference if the 35s uses the mentioned feature and solves an equation symbolically. You won't get the same. perspective even foregoing use of the LCD controller. The list is eighteen bugs if we accept this. 1. That solver (the one from the 17b/19b/27S) should be made available on every calc in HP's lineup. In a recent thread you wrote that you tried to confirm this bug but weren't able to enter the equations as equations but rather did it by keystroke programming. Second, I didn't see it as that big of a jump up from the 34C like the 41 was, and it can't hold a candle to the subsequent 42S. 6 dont get it, works either way Dead batteries. The attraction of the 15c at this point in time is the These are great advantages. First, I like the layout very much. I havnt started doing linear algebra on the 35s yet. practical benefits of running decades old black-box firmware You could have chosen all ten examples that way to show what a completely unuseable device the 35s is. 3. something less sacrilegious about bandsawing a 12c+ for Due to the limited space (14 displayable digits) this cannot be done including the exponent. But are these results completety "dud", as the bug list calls it? Almost all of the functionality of an improved HP 42S could easily have been designed into the HP 35S for only the cost of developing the firmware! I meant that i agree with you that it would not be a good return on your time to do a "WPXX" Voyager because of the screen limitations. Yes, that's certainly not nice (and I really appreciate the 34s ALL nn mode), but it's the way the 35s is supposed to work. It's a local Fiat Cinquecento ad. It can't display letters at all. You call the 35S a mid-level calculator, not high end, but HP calls the 35S the ultimate scientific calculator right on the packaging. Maybe one day HP will update the 17bii+ with a new processor and make it flashable and then our local heroes can come up with the ultimate HP-41 replacement. But the more I thought about it the more it seemed like a Even if you know how to build a MISO solver it still takes much longer to input on the WP34s vs the hp35s. Susequent high-end HPs (42S, 28 and 48 series) would have kept it there. I never found the single shift a problem with the 41. That will speak louder than anything else. Give the hardcore users a free calc and find the ellusive bugs. The menu system and polish on the 42s is awesome. I bought a 49g+ years ago when it came out. From looking around the internet it seems that the only Reverse Polish Notation (RPN) calculator still being manufactured is the HP-12 financial calculator. unless we're content to keep emulating enhanced voyager firmware. The 35S does have some features (such as binary arithmetic--even if badly implemented) that the 15C does not have. The program needs to have numbers and/or expressions in it and as far as I'm aware nobody has isolated the cause of the problem. Sure you can program your own, but it is a very steep learning curve. a COG extension or interconnect flange which will cause the In a way, all these are representative samples of the population around ;-). But if someone ever does that (and if the 12c ARM architecture is the same as the 15, or at least big enough) it would pay off to use the 12 because there will probably be a bunch of them and they'll be cheaper. Eric makes fine overlays so the original keys' functions isn't important. Its just a different algorithm. The loss of precision in the cosine routine also affects the tan-results that are obviously evaluated by dividing sine by cosine: So, the loss of precision in the tangent calculation simply is a result of the digit loss in the cosine routine. The querty keyboard makes the TI 92(+) and Voyage 200 more appealing to me then the functionally identical TI-89. shows as RADIX, so it is wrong in BOTH directions. fit the segment display aperture quite well. That's why I like progammability: I can add the capabilities that HP "left out. Try it with the original speed.- The unit change is supposed to kick in only if you hold the ON key longer than what's needed for the turning-off action. ", Put up a petition! KINOMI module was to some extent help a 16c and 15c interoperate. You could have a traverse/inverse/sideshot program and a really nice vertical curve routine that would do asymmetrical VCs if that's how you entered it. Paul & UG; Agreed for all those reasons and - why rewrite a 15LE when the ubiquitous new 12 could be repurpesed instead. What is it missing that the 15C has? There is nothing in the 35s bugs list article involving any of these computations or anything even close to them. unjustifiable dead-end effort without any reusable code as World's Most Precise RPN Calculators. While it's "possible" that something happened during the changes, the ON functionallity works very well on my CL, even at higher turbo speeds BTW. The HP-42S is slightly more usable than the HP-41 (as a calculator), IMHO. The problem is that we oldsters have long memories of the great past products that set HP apart from all the other calc manufacturers. As you point out, the manual says that ON-D should be followed by CLx. Not only of calculator design, but as to technical nomenclature, even to the point of sometimes parsing each others sentence structure. While the 35S is certainly far from the best that HP has produced, it is still very usable. (Where have I seen that particular arrangement of alpha keys before? Try putting [nl] at the end of the lines or wrap it up in [pre]...[/pre]. 1. You guys must has great memories to remember where all you eqns are and what order the variables are asked for. Out of reach is a full dot matrix display, at least without external hardware which makes using an integrated CPU with LCD controller somewhat pointless. Only the value scrolls sometimes and you can no longer see the first digit. "This video is not available in your country"? What does the number 123456788abcdef0h turn into on a 15C? Does the 41CL use the original AECROM image or the verion that you enhanced to use the 13-digit math routines? Even straight reflective (vs. That was also my opinion when I first noticed the tan bug on the HP-33S five years ago. We apologize for any inconvenience." The HP 42S had firmware versions A, B, and C in its first four years. Actually, there is one known bug in the 15c firmware. If I were to do a scientific repurposing of the Voyager hardware, starting with the 15LE makes more sense than starting with the 12C. eg: "runnin9": '9 -> {'9', 'g'}, "5EL": '5' -> {'5', 'S'}, The two line dot matrix LCD of the 35s allows for some important features the 15C will never have: So it depends on your personal preferences to some extent. I keep a couple of simple programs and a couple of equations in it. After using the hP42s for 30 years this thing is going in the bin where it belongs. For a while I hoped a bug-fixed version would appear, but I have quit. I'm certain we hit complex numbers in Calculus a time or two and definitely in that part of Physics that deals with electricity and magnetism, but beyond that I really don't remember. One (or both) of these two sizes is incorrect. My Yatz42 game has to omit soft menu labels because the minimum vertical size I could squeeze a die image into was 9 pixels high. It has remained in my drawer unused. I have done a lot of programming on the 41CV/CX and 42S and a little on the 48G+. Also, you could go to http://www.pahhc.org/keyboards.htm#The_HP42S_versus_a_proposed_HP42S+:_ and scroll to the bottom and click on the link marked "The HP42S+ ALPHA Keyboard"....Just one person's ideas. That's not at all true for the HP 42S. but it is extremely rare. I have a Ben NanoNote on my shelf which would come close if it only had a more calculator friendly keyboard.
Is A Masters In Engineering Management Worth It,
George Harrison Rosewood Telecaster Weight,
Pillsbury Pizza Dough Instructions,
How To Make Hybrid Seeds Of Marigold,
Emeril Essence Recipe,