http://www.computerworld.com/blogs/node/5323
Interesting comments, reads like this forum.
The following warnings occurred: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Warning [2] Undefined array key 111916 - Line: 275 - File: inc/plugins/threaded_mode.php PHP 8.1.2-1ubuntu2.14 (Linux)
|
HP-35 / 35th Anniversary Edition expected soon
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
▼
04-10-2007, 12:04 PM
http://www.computerworld.com/blogs/node/5323 Interesting comments, reads like this forum. ▼
04-10-2007, 03:48 PM
Why would they want to release an anniversary edition of the 35? The functions are available on any modern calculator that costs more than 99 cents. That doesn't leave much profit for HP. ▼
04-10-2007, 03:54 PM
I would go out on a limb and say they are going to do one. It will have the same shape and colors as the old unit, large enter key and so on, yet have lots more functionality. A true new calculator. :-) TW ▼
04-10-2007, 04:12 PM
I hope it has the same quality level as vintage models.
04-10-2007, 04:36 PM
Of course I'll buy one!
04-10-2007, 04:41 PM
So HP is the mysterious force who has been buying up all the HP35 calculators on ebay. Perhaps they are buying all of them up to polish them and clean them so they can sell them on the HP website!
04-10-2007, 04:52 PM
Quote:Can't imagine, but I'm willing to hope. However, it must be something revolutionary (like the HP35 was at its time), because the original function set you get for less than 10$ everywhere meanwhile. ▼
04-12-2007, 12:07 PM
I wouldn't be surprised (if a 35th Anniversary calc is released), HP could justify such an action by saying something like...
"The HP-35 was the best calculator of its time, and now the HP50G
Okay, so I'm a pessimist! Ren dona nobis pacem ▼
04-12-2007, 02:35 PM
Add a SysRPL HP-35 emulator and the cheap "special" would be complete. I suspect that someone at HP (Sam?) might see how cheesy that would be. I know it has been stated at least twice in this thread, but it bears repeating. There is no indication from HP that they will be releasing an HP-35 anniversary edition calculator of any description. No new calculator is still the most likely outcome in my opinion, but it's fun to speculate on what such a machine might look like.
Regards,
04-10-2007, 06:34 PM
And they'll probably sell quite a few. I'll buy at least two. ▼
04-10-2007, 06:55 PM
You have the offhand words of a spokeswoman, aka marketing droid, and you guys are going off the deep end with them. I think TWs comments are wishful thinking or pulling our legs. I'll eat my HP35 if HP comes out with any sort of new LED model. ▼
04-10-2007, 07:01 PM
that is was the blogger who suggested the parallel to the 12c anniversary. Read the link carefully and you won't find that stated by the spokeswoman. ▼
04-11-2007, 02:02 AM
John,
This was noted already above. For sake of clarity, once again, the only real (though only quoted) statement we have is: Quote:I think this is exciting enough. Speculation is what "a new calculator related to this anniversary" will mean. I agree it won't be LED. ▼
04-11-2007, 03:20 AM
That prospect is exciting. If true, I sort of feel like HP will be in a no-win position with respect to this community's reaction. I've heard two mutually contradictory expectations from folks. To a degree, I hold both positions myself. This leaves me only a little "twitchy" due to the cognitive dissonance. (The rest of my madness is due to other factors. 8) First, to be equal to the memory of the HP-35, a new calculator would have to be as revolutionary as the 35 was in its day. I'm not sure it's easy for those of us that didn't live through the transition to grasp just how impossible this expectation is. Jumping from the slide rule, with its long history stretching back to "Napier's Bones," its built in accuracy compromises and its slow operation, to an electronic calculator complete with most functions considered standard on a basic scientific/engineering machine today must have seemed like a very sudden leap into the future. There were no direct precedents for this product. There had been pocket calculators before, and desktop scientific calculators, but never a pocket sized scientific calculator. Second, to satisfy me, and perhaps others in this community, a new machine honoring the HP-35 would have to bring back some of the features I hold dear in the old RPN models. The large ENTER key is an obvious one, but also the RPN logic system and excellent build quality. This expectation doesn't seem like much of a stretch compared to the first one. But how the heck do you satisfy both? Do I really want the machine to be both revolutionary and traditional? (*twitch*) In order to resolve the dissonance, I think I'll let go of all expectations regarding this vaporous anniversary model 35. If HP does something to remember its former glory in the history of scientific and engineering practice, I'll be happy. If they honor the things that made the old machines so wonderful, I'll be delighted. If they transcend the handheld calculator with a device I can't even imagine, I will soar into the clouds with joy and wonder. If they do all of the above, I'll go back to being "twitchy." 8)
Regards, ▼
04-11-2007, 02:59 PM
I doubt that they would do it. I think it would be nice to make the 35 again with some what smaller form factor and with LCD display. It should have the highest contrast LCD and very high quality of construction and keyboard. It should be even tougher and have better ergonomic than the original 35. The keyboard should have the exact same 35 keys layout and with a sliding power switch and same color scheme. It would provide also exactly the same function as the original 35. Selling price for $150 and I would get one. ▼
04-11-2007, 05:40 PM
Quote: Me too. But that would be a machine purely for the enthusiast. An engineer or student in need of a basic scientific pocket calculator would look at that price and laugh. The 12C Anniversary Edition was just a nicer looking model of a still successful business calculator. People in business schools and in the workplace obviously still buy those in large numbers, without regard to the historic value. I see only two possibilities for a viable 35th anniversary HP-35. Either a low cost scientific model with styling and functions reminiscent of the original, or an entirely new calculator, perhaps called an HP-35, that does the washing and walks the dog, all with reference to the original, but not limited to the original's features. I'd prefer the latter, probably. There I go being optimistic again. It's good for my nerves.
Regards,
04-11-2007, 09:34 PM
Quote: After all these years do we really want to go back to an x^y key rather than the y^x key which was introduced with the HP-45 and used in all the subsequent H-P calculators?
04-12-2007, 03:17 PM
What will be released: An HP-50G with "35th Anniversary Edition" markings! Enjoy!
04-12-2007, 04:55 PM
May be we are getting closer...
HP calculators / RPN, An Introduction to Reverse Polish Notation "If you're a frequent calculator user, you owe it to yourself to investigate the advantages of RPN. RPN stands for Reverse Polish Notation. Reverse Polish Notation was developed in 1920 by Jan Lukasiewicz as a way to write a mathematical expression without using parentheses and brackets. Hewlett-Packard Co., realizing that Lukasiewicz's method was superior to standard algebraic(1) expressions when using calculators and computers, adapted RPN for its first hand-held scientific calculator, the HP35, in 1972." Article can be found here: HP website Mike H
▼
04-13-2007, 09:42 AM
How did you find that article? It was interesting, but I took a step back in the web address to see when it was published, and didn't see the article listed. So I took two steps back, chose US, and went forward to this page, which then has a link to the 35 anniversary article. But I still couldn't find the article you linked to. Do you know when it was published? ▼
04-13-2007, 10:33 AM
Hi Ron, I found it (link) by by searching HP35. The article was dated March 23, 2007. The idea of a simple, inexpensive, non programable scientific RPN is an idea I like.
Mike Edited: 13 Apr 2007, 10:34 a.m. ▼
04-13-2007, 04:18 PM
The calc was more RPL like than RPN. I didn't check it out carefully yet but it has the entry line and the top level stack doesn't duplicate. ▼
04-13-2007, 07:32 PM
Quote:Such things as replicating the top stack register downward may well be considered an essential part of the "Classic RPN" system used on some HP calculators, but aren't essential to RPN as a mathematical notation. To me, if the basic rules of operation are first input the arguments, and then perform an operation on them, then the system is some variety of RPN.
Regards,
04-13-2007, 09:12 PM
The source code is all there in Javascript. Just "view source" (and grovel down through tons of stuff) to see it. While the stack levels are labeled "level 1" through "level 4", the source calls them X, Y, Z and T.
Regards
04-13-2007, 07:12 PM
I think that HP's article is inaccurate. My understanding is that
Reverse Polish notation (RPN) of course reverses the position of
Regards, Edited: 13 Apr 2007, 8:17 p.m.
04-13-2007, 06:08 PM
You quoted the article as saying
Quote: But, if you go to www.woz.org/letters/general/57.html and read to the end you will find the following discussion by Wozniak, the co-inventor of the Apple computer and a former employee at HP: "... At Hewlett Packard we were so proud that our calculators, the first scientific ones ever, were years ahead of competition. They used postfix partly because the least logic or ROM chips were quite expensive back then. It would have taken extra keys and an infix to postfix translator to use infix. Also, a larger and more expensive desktop HP machine from the division in Colorado Springs used postfix, for the same reasons. The HP-35 was an attempt to miniaturize this machine. ... " That's the wonderful thing about history. It seldom tells us what really happened. More often it tells us what the historian would like us to believe. H-P, which doggedly continues to make RPN machines, even when machines with EOS (equation operating systems as on TI and Casio machines) or RPL (as on H-P machines) are clearly better when algebraic expressions are involved, can be expected to emphasize the claimed benefits of RPN to a user. Wozniak, who left H-P to develop the Apple product line which used a higher order language which is far more similar to AOS, EOS and RPL, can be expected to dismiss RPN as a language consistent with the memory limitations of the early 1970's.
The article also offers an checkbook balancing exercise as a demonstration of the superiority of RPN. With RPN or with an adding machine one enters the last balance, enters a value and presses plus or minus depending on whether the value was a debit or a credit, and sees the result. With algebraic one enters the last balance, looks ahead to see whether the next entry is a debit or credit and enters a plus or minus depending on whether the next entry is a debit or credit, One then enteres the value, looks ahead again to select a plus or minus, and when the plus or minus is entered sees the result of the previous transaction. This means that at the end of the balancing exercise the RPN user will have used exactly one less keystroke. Of course, the "looking ahead" which the AOS user finds natural and appropriate in this case is similar in a sense to the "looking ahead to find a starting point" which the RPN user find natural and appropriate when solving complex algebraic expressions such as the famous Mach Number equation. ▼
04-13-2007, 08:03 PM
True, different versions of history are often available, depending
I expect that the real reason for using RPN in early models was at Yes, the advantage of saving keystrokes is often overstated.
For me, the advantage of RPN is mostly that it seems more
A basic feature of RPN is that the result of any operation is left
Regards, Edited: 13 Apr 2007, 8:07 p.m. ▼
04-14-2007, 08:10 PM
You wrote:
[quote] You may be correct on the "number crunching" idea, particularly if one does it step by step without the help of a program. The requirement for that sort of number-crunching was an inherent part of aerodynamics in the late 1940's when I was an undergraduate in aeronautical engineering, and was a part of my decision to do other kinds of engineering. By the time I encountered a need to do a lot of number crunching in the 1960's I had easy access to a computer network with an extended BASIC capability. I soon learned to reduce the number crunching to a program which made it palatable. You were, of course, correct in Message #28 with your comment on the discussion of the origins of RPN. In summary, I suggest that the H-P of the olden days wouldn't have let an article like that get into print. But, the emulator is kind of clever. The four line display speaks to one area of RPN that always has given me trouble, namely, how to keep track of what is in the stack without writing it down or doing endless roll-up's. Palmer ▼
04-15-2007, 01:54 PM
RPN in HP style really shines if keystroke errors are to be corrected. ▼
04-15-2007, 11:19 PM
My guess is that if HP does anything at all to celebrate it will update the 33s with a few software corrections and give it a facelift changing the key shape and layout, label colors and body color. Will they rename it? Maybe they will call it the 35s. This is similar to how they reimaged the 49G+ into the 50G. Regards, John ▼
04-16-2007, 04:58 AM
Well, if they make the 33S look like a 35 it would be a huge improvement. I don't think they're smart enough to do that though. The 33S was they're best shot at a decent, simple RPN calc and they ruined it with that sick perverted design. I can't even look at it let alone buy it. ▼
04-16-2007, 10:52 PM
Will H-P will do something which picks up on the 35th anniversary of the introduction of the HP-35? Of course they will! From a marketing perspective it is just too good an opportunity After all, with an HP-35 designation and a 35th anniverary logo somewhere on the body HP-RPN afficianados will buy at least one whether or not they like how the machine looks and operates. What key colors will be used? The original HP-35 used blue keys. Machines such as the HP-67 and the Voyagers used yellow and blue keys. However, the 35tb wedding anniversary gift is defined as coral for traditioinal practice and jade (i.e., green) for contemporary practice. The HP-33s already has a green key for selecting green options and a red key for selecting red options. Water down the red a little and you approach coral, and there you are.
04-16-2007, 11:21 PM
Bernie wrote:
Quote: The advocates of algebraic have always held that is the essence of dumb and dumber to insist on using a LOL (Lower Order Language) machine to evaluate equations if a HOL (Higher Order Language) machine is available. But, there have always been strong differences of opinion about the relative merits of RPN and Algebraic. In the olden days the HP/RPN community wrote about the TI/AOS community as being "the dark side". The TI/AOS community noted that the acronym RPN actually stood for Really Pathetic Notation. When I shared that with Richard Nelson last summer when we were discussing the differences between machines and users he responded that the correct definition was Really Powerful Notation. We agreed to disagree. I suggest that the HP/RPN and TI/AOS communities are not only different but, more importantly, are each insular and provincial in their own ways. That isn't just my idea. When Wozniak wrote of finding that the famous (or maybe infamous) Mach number equation was easily solved with one of TI's early scientific machines he reported that "... My colleagues couldn't believe it. I told them that you just copy the formula from left to right but not one of them could see through their postfix fog. ... ... None of them could do what I had done, forget that they have to be smart." It isn't just the HP/RPN community. The TI/AOS community is just as provincial with [see my comment above] the emphasis on why would anyone want to evaluate an equation other than by simply entering it as one sees it on paper if only one could. |