hp 35s arrived



#2

Finally hp 35s!

http://www.calculators-hp.com/pdf/35s.pdf


#3

Note that the BIG ENTER key is back and in the proper place.


#4

Seems they've been reading this forum...


Looking forward to seeing this calc.


#5

holy shit, they listened! They even put on the silver strip as a reference to the 35. It's all there, look at the feature list. I jsut can't believe it. Anybody know when this wonder will be available in Europe?


#6

That exceeds my expectations, even some of my dreams. Seems we have some more readers than we did know so far. Where and when can I order one?


#7

Don't you mean two? That's what I'm buying, and since hearing my fathers response this news he will be doing the same.


#8

Hugh,

so far, I'm content with one sample of each scientific HP model. I don't see a need to change this policy, also since I hope for more models of similar kind and design. I've got some models aged >30, and they are still going strong :-) And HP won't stop production of this new 35s after some months, I guess, based on all the resonance seen here. BTW, this buying policy saves some money for other expenses, too...

#9

Quote:
Anybody know when this wonder will be available in Europe?

Perhaps sooner than in North America. After not finding anything about the HP-35s at HP's official website (www.hp.com/calculators), I decided to browse the site originally provided (http://www.calculators-hp.com), and found the following:


www.calculators-hp.com is the official hp partner site for EMEA.

In 2007, Solution Micro System (SMS) has become the official importer and distributor for hp calculators for Europe, Middle East & Africa. SMS is more seeking for resellers & partners in each available countries.

In 2006, SMS has become the official partner ans importer for HP Calculators for EMEA*. In 2007, SMS is setting up a complete network of exclusive distributor per country.

www.sms.fr

* SMS has distribution for all Europe, Middle East Africa excluding Spain, Portugal,Germany, Austia and Italy.


My nearest full-service retailer (in Wilsonville, Oregon) did not have any HP-35s in stock.

I would hope that the HP-35s is the replacement for the HP-33s.

I'm still wondering about a few things on the HP-35s, but the answers will have to wait until it's available. I, too, noticed the square brackets and the new "(j)". Yes, square brackets are how matrices are denoted on RPL-based models; "(i)" and "(j)" could serve as matrix indices. Matrices would also be the best use of "800+ independent storage registers". However, I'm just not seeing any commands that would provide matrix functionality. (Consider the HP-15C, with function keywords MATRIX, DIM, RESULT, and a number-coded set of useful functions.)

Remember also that the indirect pointer-containing register was denoted "i" on the HP-33S, and that "(i)" provided access to the pointed register. Lower case was used to prevent confusion with the lettered register "I". On the HP-35S, however, there is an "i" that enters the basis of imaginary-valued numbers. So, "(j)" could be used to provide access to the pointed register now specified in "(i)".

Just curious: Where are "IP" and "FP"? I also don't see polar<->rectangular conversions, which might now reside under "ARG".

UNDO is a good use of RPL functionality to exploit the 31 kB of memory. However, the HP-32/33 paradigm and apparent lack of I/O will still render all that RAM difficult to fully utilize.

As far as I can tell, the HP-35s is still not an HP-15C, but it's a vast improvement over the HP-33s.

-- KS


Edited: 29 May 2007, 12:55 a.m. after one or more responses were posted


#10

I wonder if they will continue to be HP's EMEA partner after leaking this news. HP hates that sort of thing. Does the site have product in stock? I'm betting they don't. Outpost.com (owned by Fry's Electronics) is still selling the 33s as of this evening, so I think we are dealing with a prerelease announcement.

IP and FP do appear to be missing. These are very basic programming functions, so that leads me to wonder if there isn't more this calculator than meets the eye. Perhaps there are functions only accessible through menus? (Or perhaps "XEQ" is more like it's namesake on the 41C/42S?) Good catch on UNDO, also.

Regards,
Howard

Edited: 28 May 2007, 9:24 p.m.


#11

LOGIC seems like a good place to lump tests and looping. . .

TW


#12

Ignore that. I was obviously not reading that correctly and thinking of something else.

TW

#13

Quote:
IP and FP do appear to be missing.

I suppose that all integer functions were moved to a menu under INTG. IP and FP are not the only two functions missing; there are also INT/ and Rmdr.

i.

P.S. Very, very nice looking calculator. It looks like a HP device should: unassuming but powerful.

#14

Karl; ARG might be a function to run pirated software ;-)

I don't recognize nCr or nPr. Could that be another way of saying polar<>rectangular?

I won't be giving up my 41, but i'm buying one. I hope that it has the great battery handling system of the 33s.


#15

Quote:
I don't recognize nCr or nPr. Could that be another way of saying polar<>rectangular?

I'm betting Combinations and Permutations.

Best,

--- Les

[http://www.lesbell.com.au]

#16

Quote:
I don't recognize nCr or nPr. Could that be another way of saying polar<>rectangular?

Combination,

Permutation,


#17

Les & Egan: Statistically speaking; you guys have a good chance of being right. All i learned about stats when i was in college in Nevada was to stay out of the casinos.

Hard to believe they left off p<>r & r<>p. I think that hp invented that. Oh well; no better way to get to know a new calc than writing two programs for it.


#18

Quote:
All i learned about stats when i was in college in Nevada was to stay out of the casinos.

I don't know whether to say "Hah" to that, or "ARG". 8)

Regards,
Howard

#19

Quote:
Anybody know when this wonder will be available in Europe?

Have you read the French version?


"du 29 mai au 1er juin 2007
Monaco
Hall Apollinaire
Stand W58"

http://www.calculatrices-hp.com/

Regards,

Gerson.


#20

Hi, Gerson --

After reviewing the French-language version website (with a little on-line translating), it seems to me that the HP-35S and HP-10S will be exhibited or introduced at this "MEDPI" electronics fair in Monaco during 29 May - 1 June, but the models will not be available for retail until sometime in Summer. I don't know if US/Canada introduction will be concurrent with 'foreign' introduction.

Note that "ete" (e's are 'accented') means "summer", and "juillet" means "July".

-- KS


#21

Karl,

on the home page (ACCUEIL) of this company, you can even choose an English version (e.g. for 'foreigners'), and you'll find "where to buy" with the following information for UK, Ireland, The Netherlands etc. In France, fnac is one of their distributors. No information for Germany, so I will continue checking.

Regards, Walter

#22

I have heard from a local Australian dealer that the 35S has not even gone to mass production stage yet, so don't expect it anytime soon.

Dave.

#23

Hi, all --

Quote:
Seems they've been reading this forum...

Looking forward to seeing this calc.


Quote:
holy s**t, they listened!

I'll say! Yes, I strongly suspect that HP has been reading this Forum, because it seems that practically every item that I and others have posted about -- and more -- has been addressed. For example:

  • The yellow-and-blue colors on a dark background with rectangular beveled keys for a neat arrangement is immediately noticable.
  • The one-line complex-number display with "i" key and blue-shifted angle is present, and I hope it works as I've advocated.
  • HYP is adjacent to the trigonometric keys.
  • The logical grouping is much improved.
  • The minimally-useful cube root and cube (x3) functions seem to be absent, despite what the ad copy says.

Yes, fundamentally it's a redesigned HP-33S, but the effort at first glance is very impressive.

I'll get one ASAP.

-- KS


Edited: 28 May 2007, 8:55 p.m.

#24

Alas, R/S and E+ are swapped... but I can live with this for sure!!!!


#25

Quote:
Alas, R/S and E+ are swapped... but I can live with this for sure!!!!

Arse to you to ;-)
#26

I'd like to use both the HP-50g and the HP-35s, but the lack of a keyboard standard might be a problem. I particularly appreciated the row above the ENTER key, as it almost matches the one on the HP-48G/GX keyboard. If only there were an HP-50g version with this key pattern...


#27

When I grew from being a mere HP user to being a collector, one of the 1st awakenings I went through was the keyboard variations. After 4 years of collecting, I cam now quite good at going back and forth. It is rather similar to going from the workplace computer to the home computer--you just switch gears as it were.

I think a keyboard "standard" would be rather constricting to good design; on the other hand certain functions certainly do belong near each other.

One other ancedote:

I used an 11c for 13 years non-stop--and then had to replace it with the 32sii. I quickly adapted to that machine, appreciating its similarities with the 11c, along with the changes generally all for the better. Nevertheless when I finally bought an 11c again to begin my collection, I was amazed at how I was instantly back home. I found I even remembered the keycodes from programming it!


#28

Of course the keyboard standard would apply only to a small subset of keys: [0]..[9], [ENTER],[/],[*],[-],[+],[+/-],[EEX], [SIN], [COS], [TAN], [SQRT], [HYP], [y^x], [1/x], the shift keys, the shifted functions LN/e^x, LOG/10^x, x^2 and xSQRTy, for instance.
This would make things easier for the user when switching from the graphic to the scientific calculator. Anyone who uses the HP-50g and the HP-33s on a regular basis knows what I mean :-)

#29

It seems to very sorted : It is real isn't it ?

Okay where can I buy one - it's not on the HP site

Don't want to sound ungrateful, but Please Sir, does it come in a Voyager version.

#30

Wow!

Now, everyone who promised to buy 2 or 3, put your money where your mouth is.

#31

Looks amazingly like a 33s with a rearranged keyboard and a handsome case.

I want one too.


- Pauli


#32

At a glance. the features do indeed look very similar to a 33s. I have hope for the programming model. The mention of "800+" registers means they've put some thought into how to use the ~32K of memory, much of which went to waste in the 33s. Perhaps you can have 800+ labels now, too.

It sounds like they listened carefully to the feedback they got at last year's HHC.

Regards,
Howard

#33

I notice (i) and (j) down the bottom. It might have improved indirect register access capabilities, kind of needed if it does have 800+ registers...


- Pauli

#34

Looks like a dealer. There's nothing on HP's site as yet.

Domain: calculators-hp.com

Created: 2005-06-08 16:07:16.90 CET
Expires: 2007-06-08 16:07:16.90 CET
Changed: 2006-05-30 16:36:12.15 CET

Owner-id: SMS3
Owner-name: Solution Micro System (SMS)
Owner-organization: Solution Micro System (SMS)
Owner-street1: 90-92 rue Baudin
Owner-city: Levallois Perret
Owner-postcode: 92300
Owner-countrycode: FR
Owner-phone: (Redacted)


#35

http://h40047.www4.hp.com/certificates/media.php/doc/computers/handhelds_and_calculators/CE_35s_Scientific_Calculator_HSTNJ-KN01.pdf


#36

Just a tad deep, that link. 8) How did you drill down to it?

Regards,
Howard


P.S.

Yippee!

#37

Not only a big ENTER key, but a slightly modernized "tall key" design. Excellent! Lets hope these are solid hinged keys, not the wobbly rubber keys. And RPN keystroke programming, not RPL. I'm in!


#38

Based on the keyboard, the available functions seem very similar to those on the 33S, although cosmetically the 35S is much superior.

The question is whether or not the 35S has better programming capabilities than the 33S. The 33S, like its predecessors the 32S and 32SII, had very limited numbers of variables and labels, which hindered programming. Basically, the 33S is limited to single-letter, non-repeating variables and labels ("A", "X", "T", etc.).

The brochure indicates that the 35S has "800+ Memory Registers", so something must be different. No indication about the number of labels. There doesn't appear to be an alpha-lock key, which suggests that the 35S still may not support long variable names.

Apparently no I/O.


Edited: 28 May 2007, 5:52 p.m.

#39

Any indication of a price anywhere?!

Has the same weight as my 33s (which is about half that of my 35), so construction is probably similar.


#40

I just got my first 35, and I was surprised by its weight. The keyboard looks so similar to later TI models, all of which were lightweights, that the heft was disconcerting. I weighed it just now on my questionably accurate postal scale, and came up with 8.5 Oz. However, taking out the battery dropped it down to 6.5 Oz. My 33s weighs in at 4.4 Oz, so that cuts the difference in half.

Regards,

Howard

#41

Congrats to all of you patient HP RPN fellows!

Looks like a beautiful product worth to be added to my HP calculator line as well - although my daily work is focussed more on using the financial line of HPs calculators.

For us Europeans one questions comes up after reading through the announcement of SMS (claiming to be the new EMEA distributor) - will Moravia Consulting still honor their extended 3 years warranty for the HP49G+ ???

Best regards

Peter A. Gebhardt

Edited: 28 May 2007, 7:15 p.m.

#42

And to think you guys tried to beat my enthusiasm into submission! :-P
I will accept appologies ;-)

It's not up on the HP website yet. Doesn't look fake though, and it's past April fools, must be the real thing!

I wonder if in RPN mode you get both X and Y regs displayed on the two line display like the 42S?
Presumably the firmware would come from the 33S?

I do hope it's got proper rubber feet on the bottom!

I'm surprised there is no special 35th anniversary marking on the case.

Things I like:
- It's got the right "look" deserving of the 35s title.
- Traditional key placement including the large ENTER key
- Separate exponent, 1/x, and sqrt keys, the most used keys IMHO (they could have goofed this one)
- The colour contrast on the keys looks good.
- Appears to strike a good balance of features in order to keep it a basic scientific but make it marketable to the general public.
- Raised edges to protect the keys.

(Selfish) Things I dislike:
- The arrow keys. A basic scientific shouldn't need them.
- It's too powerful for my needs, and the result is having shifted keys that I would have preferred to have as dedicated.
- It's too big and thick, I would have preferred something a bit smaller
-Battery life could be longer.

Of course the negatives are quite minor and personal, overall I think they have done a supurb job, my hat is off to the people at HP, it appears they really do care!
I think they are on a winner.

Just hope the quality is there.

Dave.


#43

OMG this is beautiful! Is it real? Really??


#44

See Donald's post (#13) above. 8)

Regards,
Howard

#45

Quote:

- The arrow keys. A basic scientific shouldn't need them.


Think "matrix editing." 8)

One can certainly make a case that matrices are an advanced feature, too. But I think that's why the navigation keys are there. (They were there on the 33s, too, with less justification.)

Regards,
Howard

#46

I would have preferred traditional keys instead of the "cursor diamond", but please see that the up and down keys may be used to navigate menus and programs... something we used to do with SST and BST, which doesn´t appear in the 35s. Left and right allow for editing, more convenient than just backspace... but, by the way, at its time we welcomed backspace as more convenient than just CLx...


#47

I actually prefer the cross-configuration of the cursor keys. I find it more intuitive or ergonomic.


#48

Quote:
I actually prefer the cross-configuration of the cursor keys. I find it more intuitive or ergonomic.

I think it makes the 35s look like a game controller or a TV remote control. However, it's a big improvement over anything HP's done for a long while. It's just not quite good enough yet for me to want one.


#49

Quote:
I think it makes the 35s look like a game controller or a TV remote control.
If you say so, but it seems to me that's a matter of conditioning rather than an inherent resemblance. The cross layout is logically valid for moving a cursor on a screen intuitively in two dimensions.

#50

Quote:
The cross layout is logically valid for moving a cursor on a screen intuitively in two dimensions.

Perhaps, but those keys have a different size, shape, color and layout than all the other keys, which I find visually distracting. I'd like them to be just like all the others in their section of the keyboard, such as on the HP48. In fact, I'd prefer that all the keys were exactly the same size, shape and color (except the [ENTER] key) and that they were laid out in even rows, with the same number of keys on each row and the [ENTER] key exactly twice the size of the others, so that the keys formed a perfect grid, and the only way to tell them apart would be by reading what's printed on them.


#51

Well, ta di da.

How nice that you have appointed yourself king of all standards.

You want them all the same size except the ENTER key? How consistent of you.

Be consistent and have all of them the same size.

I bet HP is crying that you won't be buying one.


#52

You might have noticed that I said I'd prefer they all be the same size. There are a lot of other things I'd prefer, too: Like perfectly straight sides, knife-sharp edges and corners (no curves or rounding of any surface) on the cases, etc. But no calculator -- even my all-time favorite, the HP-41 -- had those features. I'd like to have those things, but they aren't essentials. The only flaw that keeps me from wanting a 35s -- the only "deal-breaker" for me -- is the cursor-key issue.

Yes, I'm sure HP doesn't care whether I buy one or not. They probably don't even care about the tens of thousands of dollars my employer spent on Sun equipment after I recommended against HP-UX servers, but it made me feel better.


#53

Quote:
There are a lot of other things I'd prefer, too: Like perfectly straight sides, knife-sharp edges and corners (no curves or rounding of any surface) on the cases, etc.

I know, I know, you would prefer to have blood gushing down your arm if you squeeze the calculator too tightly, and you'd want holes in your shirt pocket if you put the calculator in your pocket. Last time you said you wanted the knife-sharp edges I thought you were exaggerating, but now I'm not so sure. Somehow I don't think anyone else would be interested in something so impractical. I carry a knife on my keychain so I don't have to use my calculator to cut things.

Rounded edges make it much more comfortable to hold and prevent it from causing excess wear on its case (or anything else it touches -- I don't want my wood tabletop dented because I dropped the calculator a few inches onto it). Plus, sharp edges chip more easily, so rounding the edges makes the calculator itself more durable.

Something you need to realize is that not all change is bad. Sometimes changes, perhaps through improvements in manufacturing technology, make things more usable. For example, it makes sense to make all buttons the same size and color if you are trying to save money when manufacturing the product, but I want a premium calculator, and therefore I am willing to pay extra to have buttons of different sizes and colors to improve usability.


#54

Quote:
I know, I know, you would prefer to have blood gushing down your arm if you squeeze the calculator too tightly, and you'd want holes in your shirt pocket if you put the calculator in your pocket. Last time you said you wanted the knife-sharp edges I thought you were exaggerating, but now I'm not so sure. Somehow I don't think anyone else would be interested in something so impractical. I carry a knife on my keychain so I don't have to use my calculator to cut things.

Some of my slide rules have sharp edges and corners, but I've never cut myself on any of them, even the metal ones. In particular, my aluminum Pickett N600-ES has such sharp corners and edges on the slide that it probably could be used as a weapon. (I've always found it amusing that airport security lets me carry it on planes while forbidding less "dangerous" items.) The leather case protects both the rule itself and my pockets from damage.

My coffee table also has corners that would draw blood if I bumped a knee against it, but somehow I've survived it all these years.

Quote:
Something you need to realize is that not all change is bad. Sometimes changes, perhaps through improvements in manufacturing technology, make things more usable. For example, it makes sense to make all buttons the same size and color if you are trying to save money when manufacturing the product, but I want a premium calculator, and therefore I am willing to pay extra to have buttons of different sizes and colors to improve usability.

But what I'd really like is a change. None of the HP calculators with which I'm familiar has all the buttons the same size and shape; the number buttons generally are larger than the others. And even the HP-41 has slightly curved sides; plus, it's thicker at one end than the other. What I really would like is a calculator that is a geometrically perfect rectangle, with uniform thickness and everything laid out to be perfectly symmetrical with nothing but arrow-straight lines meeting in perfect right angles. The more it resembled a precision-cut slab of polished black marble, in appearance, surface texture, and weight, the better I'd like it. I'd be willing to pay extra for that.


#55

Quote:
The more it resembled a precision-cut slab of polished black marble, in appearance, surface texture, and weight, the better I'd like it. I'd be willing to pay extra for that.

Gene: But no one else would, or certainly not enough people.

I hope you find what you're looking for. The 48gx has curves, BTW.

I agree with Eric.


#56

Quote:
I hope you find what you're looking for. The 48gx has curves, BTW.

Yes, I know. I already said HP has never made a calculator with all the design features I'd like (and neither has anyone else, as far as I know). I don't expect anyone ever will, either. That's why I might be willing to settle for a 35s, if they would replace those cursor keys with the HP48 arrangement.

#57

Quote:
What I really would like is a calculator that is a geometrically perfect rectangle, with uniform thickness and everything laid out to be perfectly symmetrical with nothing but arrow-straight lines meeting in perfect right angles. The more it resembled a precision-cut slab of polished black marble, in appearance, surface texture, and weight, the better I'd like it. I'd be willing to pay extra for that.

Cue recording of "Also Sprach Zarathustra".

And would the edges be in the ratio of 1:4:9?

How would you distinguish the keys and read the display, if the whole thing is featureless black?

Don't ever set foot inside the cockpit of a plane. All the controls are different colours and shapes, for perfectly valid usability reasons. You'd hate it.

Best,

--- Les

[http://www.lesbell.com.au]


#58

Quote:
Cue recording of "Also Sprach Zarathustra".

And would the edges be in the ratio of 1:4:9?


I've used the Monolith before as an example of the sort of thing I have in mind. Yes, I'd love a calculator that looked like that.

Quote:
How would you distinguish the keys and read the display, if the whole thing is featureless black?

I never said it had to look exactly like a slab of marble. I said "The more it resembled" such a thing, "the better I'd like it."

Quote:
Don't ever set foot inside the cockpit of a plane. All the controls are different colours and shapes, for perfectly valid usability reasons. You'd hate it.

Too late. I've flown with a pilot friend in small planes on a number of occasions, and used those controls myself. (He handled the take-offs and landings, and let me fly between airports, "fly the pattern" and make the approaches.) I like aircraft gauges and controls (especially those in large planes) for one reason: They look insanely complicated to the uninitiated. That's another thing I like in a calculator, too. I like any sort of equipment that looks cryptic and intimidating to those who haven't taken the time to master it; hence my extreme dislike of things like the 33s that try to look "cool" or "friendly" to non-technical people. Dark, somber colors, and a heavy, solid, industrial appearance that says, "Watch out, you need a great deal of expertise before you even think of trying to use me!" are what I prefer.


#59

Quote:
Dark, somber colors, and a heavy, solid, industrial appearance that says, "Watch out, you need a great deal of expertise before you even think of trying to use me!" are what I prefer.

Gene: Oh, that would be a big seller.

Only Wayne and about 6 others would buy such a thing. Amortizing the cost, I'd expect it to be $30,000 each at least.

#60

Quote:
What I really would like is a calculator that is a geometrically perfect rectangle, with uniform thickness and everything laid out to be perfectly symmetrical with nothing but arrow-straight lines meeting in perfect right angles. The more it resembled a precision-cut slab of polished black marble, in appearance, surface texture, and weight, the better I'd like it. I'd be willing to pay extra for that.

Are you thinking of that monolith in "2001", some 5 years before HP35A? Anyway, HP's key history (sic!) is a line of cost cutting: starting with 4 groups of individual keys in different colors on HP35A, running through all black individual keys on the Voyagers (but still colored prefixes), down to a grid of all black keys on the Pioneers and 48s. So, the line was running towards your target!

#61

Quote:
Are you thinking of that monolith in "2001", some 5 years before HP35A?

Yes, I was.

#62

Quote:
The more it resembled a precision-cut slab of polished black marble, in appearance, surface texture, and weight, the better I'd like it.

Plus it would match your kitchen ;-)
#63

Quote:
Perhaps, but those keys have a different size, shape, color and layout than all the other keys, which I find visually distracting.
I can appreciate that, but for some reason I don't find it annoying. The fact that the cursor keys are unique in their function of navigation vs. command execution justifies their unique appearance. It's sort of like a keyboard and mouse combination on a pc. The cursor keys serve as a sort of mouse, so their inconsistent appearance is consistent with their purpose.


Edited: 29 May 2007, 4:19 p.m.

#64

Quote:
I actually prefer the cross-configuration of the cursor keys. I find it more intuitive or ergonomic.

It's certainly a huge improvement over the travesty on the 33s. The stupid keys at the top of the machine are among its worst features, in my opinion.

Regards,

Howard

#65

Quote:
.. but please see that the up and down keys may be used to navigate menus and programs...

That's the way they are used on the 33s - and the 42s, btw.

Regards,
Howard

#66

Probably not the only one, but the following key appears to have open and close parens, as well as square brackets.

It's hard to tell from this blowup from the PDF. The bottom one could be a capital pi. But coupled with the parens in white, I think it's likely square brackets.

Regards,
Howard

Edited: 28 May 2007, 6:20 p.m.


#67

My impression, too. Round brackets on top, square brackets in blue. If you do not allow implicit multiplication, then you need just one key for ALG-mode parentheses:

If pressed after an operation (+, -, *, /, y^x), it will open a new parenthesis.

If pressed after a number, it will close a parenthesis.

Please also note the red print on the keys "0" and ".": there seem to be two index registers, i and j.

Edited: 28 May 2007, 6:48 p.m. after one or more responses were posted


#68

So it's interesting to speculate what the square brackets might be about. There's this mention of 800 memory registers. Do you suppose they've added a matrix implementation? That's where my money is.

Regards,
Howard

Edited: 28 May 2007, 6:49 p.m.


#69

I was about to ask this, but you were faster :-)

Regards,

Gerson.


#70

I believe that's an old friend, indirect i, on the left. On the right is what looks like indirect j!

Regards,
Howard


#71

Please read my post above ;-)


#72

Right, Walter. I see you mentioned that. 8) I missed it in my excitement about a matrix implementation.

regards,
Howard


#73

I mentioned it above too (& earlier :-)
I don't see a 'j' key though so this might be a deviation from the 32s way.

- Pauli


#74

Yup, Pauli. I formally recognize your claim to be the first one to post about this new feature. 8)

Regards,
Howard

#75

So no 15C replacement for the time being. One could always implement some matrix operations, but it's not the same thing as having them built-in.
Let's wait for the HP-45S :-)

Regards,

Gerson.


#76

I don't think an indirection by j key precludes a matrix implementation. Or did I misunderstand you?

Regards,
Howard


#77

Quote:
Or did I misunderstand you?

I misunderstood you, sorry!

So, what might have been implemented? Matrix inversion could be invoked by the 1/x key, for instance, but I don't see where a simultaneous equation solver might be hiding...

Regards,

Gerson.


#78

There's a SOLVE key, which could have more capability than the solver on the 33S.

I don't know for a fact that matrices are implemented on the new machine. But taking the square brackets, the two indirection operators and the 800 registers together, I'm guessing that some sort of matrix solution is in there. the evidence is a little thin, I'll admit.


The other unknown operator I notice is the ARG hey. (It is definitely "ARG" and not "ALG".) Any guesses as to what that is?

Regards,
Howard


#79

Quote:
(It is definitely "ARG" and not "ALG".) Any guesses as to what that is?

Same as on the 48G, Argument, I think...

Regards,

Gerson.

P.S.: But theta is already on the same key...


Edited: 28 May 2007, 9:14 p.m.

#80

It would certainly be nice if matrix functionality is included, but I'm skeptical since it is not mentioned in the datasheet -- and matrix functions would be more noteworthy than cube root! But, here's to hoping.

The measurements indicate that the 35s is about the same size as the 33S in length and width, albeit somewhat thicker. I would really like something thin like the 6s.


#81

Quote:
It would certainly be nice if matrix functionality is included, but I'm skeptical since it is not mentioned in the datasheet -- and matrix functions would be more noteworthy than cube root! But, here's to hoping.

Ugh. Good point.

Regards,
Howard

#82

The same place it's 'hiding' on a 42S: /
#83

Pi is on the COS key so square brackets seems likely.

- Pauli

#84

I see evidence of this in that brochure. The headline is

Quote:
Get professional performance from the ultimate RPN scientific
programmable calculator. Switch between RPN* and
algebraic entry-system logic at any time.

It's "The ultimate RPN scientific .." And you can "[s]witch between RPN and algebraic" as you like. Note the order. Finally, the picture has the RPN annunciator lit.

Regards,
Howard

#85

I had to give this a good long look to make sure it wasn't a cruel joke. That looks like a REAL Hp calculator.

-Hugh

#86

OK, the first one discovering the owner's manual online will receive 95 points! d:-)

#87

This should be enough proof that it's authentic:
http://h40047.www4.hp.com/certificates/media.php/doc/computers/handhelds_and_calculators/CE_35s_Scientific_Calculator_HSTNJ-KN01.pdf?jumpid=reg_R1002_USEN


#88

So now the question is when and where can we buy it. I'd add and for how much, except I don't care how much!


#89

What is it that makes you go crazy over this small picture?


#90

If you have you ask, you've been under a rock for the last five plus years. Or perhaps a bridge, so: Please don't feed the trolls...

#91

Quote:
What is it that makes you go crazy over this small picture?

What makes you care?
#92

Well I guess I was wrong by thinking that HP will ONLY slap a 35th anniversary logo onto an existing model. The new little machine looks very nice and well designed (love that ENTER key). What's the price and when will it be available???

Namir


#93

Quote:
when will it be available???

It appears this one and the new 10S will be presented tomorrow, in Monaco:

http://www.calculatrices-hp.com/

Regards,

Gerson.

#94

Anyone else notice that the Left and Right shift keys don't actually make sense, as the functions aren't listed Left/Right on the keys, but Up and Down?

Colour coding is consistent though.

And what's with the red "Ab/c" mark below the "." key, it sticks out like a dogs hind leg!

Dave.


#95

Quote:
Anyone else notice that the Left and Right shift keys don't actually make sense, as the functions aren't listed Left/Right on the keys, but Up and Down?

Colour coding is consistent though.


Just as much sense as 'f' and 'g' (and sometimes 'h') meant!

Interesting that there are both ARG and LASTx (shifted) functions, as well as both INTEG and Integralsign.

Keep in mind that the actual released 33S had some different key placements than depicted in pre-release photos.

In addition to the apparently missing polar/rectangular conversions, I don't see how to change modes between RPN and algebraic -- perhaps buried in the FLAGS menu?

Since [if?] this is to be officially announced soon, then those who have been playing with it and bound by NDA will soon be able to answer our questions (and we know who you are!!).

Edited: 28 May 2007, 11:57 p.m. after one or more responses were posted


#96

Quote:
In addition to the apparently missing polar/rectangular conversions, I don't see how to change modes between RPN and algebraic -- perhaps buried in the FLAGS menu?

Ot maybe in the MODE menu.

Regards,
Howard


#97

Quote:


Ot maybe in the MODE menu.


D'Oh!

#98

Quote:


Ot maybe in the MODE menu.

Regards,
Howard


I assumed that's what the shifted LOGIC key does.

#99

See my post below. 8)

The terms of the NDA state that we are free to discuss that which has been publicly revealed by others, not necessarily just by HP.

Regards,
Howard

Quote:
And what's with the red "Ab/c" mark below the "." key, it sticks out like a dogs hind leg!

That's the fraction entry function, same as on the 33s. It looked like it was pasted on as an afterthought on the 33s, too. Only with the 35s, the color contrast is beter, so it's even more obvious. 8)
The reason it's stuck on is that it is neither a main, left or right shifted key. Its fraction input function is enabled in context. So

1 . 2 . 3 
is one and two thirds, the second period changing the meaning of the preceding and following digits.

Regards,
Howard

Quote:
Anyone else notice that the Left and Right shift keys don't actually make sense, as the functions aren't listed Left/Right on the keys, but Up and Down?

Fix for the right shift key.




Edited: 29 May 2007, 1:41 a.m.


Also, notice that the arrows aren't even the same font for the two shift keys. It looks like what is pictured is an early prototype with a few comsetic issues still to be addressed.

My only question is where can I buy one?

Hal.


Quote:
Also, notice that the arrows aren't even the same font for the two shift keys. It looks like what is pictured is an early prototype with a few comsetic issues still to be addressed.

My only question is where can I buy one?

Hal.

I notice the HP35s has disappeared from both http://www.calculators-hp.com and http://www.calculatrices-hp.com/ .

From http://www.calculators-hp.com/pdf/35s.pdf :
"Rely on HP quality and award-wining support"

Award-wining support...
Wonder whether it's red wine or champagne :)


Oooh, someone got their hand slapped!! :-)

I personally am thankful to SMS that they screwed up and we have a chance to drool for a few months. But I imagine the guys at HP are pretty pissed...

I wonder how long, in hours, the actual link was up there??

thanks,
bruce


I don't think HP have problems
with the information shown at calculators-hp.com
HP anounce a few months ago a contest for the 35yrs of HP-35
and a new aniversary calculator. Also see HP-35 photos in
comp-sys48 posted by cyrille (nice photos).


Took me some minutes to find them. To make it easier for you, the links are here and here.


Edited: 31 May 2007, 2:42 a.m.


Walter!!!

How did you do that??? Does your child have a calculator supplier we don't know?

Namir

Edited: 31 May 2007, 6:23 a.m.


Cyrille (hpmad) is one of HP's calculator developers.


Quote:
Cyrille (hpmad) is one of HP's calculator developers.


Make that "HP's only calculator developer," as of last year, at any rate.

You met him at HHC, Namir.

Regards,
Howard

the little guy is scowling in the second pic.

perhaps he is displeased with the keypad layout?

Les

Quote:

Fix for the right shift key.


Thanks, I'll order mine with one of those keys please!

Perhaps there will be a "limited edition" model with a corrected upside down key?

Dave.

Maybe Mr. Hurd has heard at last!

tm

And for those who can read french ....
http://www.calculatrices-hp.com/pdf/35s_anniv.pdf

It sure looks great.

The end reads:

Rooted in a challenge defined personnally by Bill Hewlett, HP's co-founder, HP's handheld calculators are a cornerstone of HP innovations.

After committing to innovation in calculators, HP will continue in the future to define the technological landscape of calculators.

There's hope, it seems.



Edited: 29 May 2007, 12:27 a.m.

Since this has been publicly revealed, I'm free to state that we were shown a layout like this (keys only, no function labels) at last year's HHC conference. They were very closed lipped on the details other than the fact that they were working on a machine, and that it was shaped like you see, with a big ENTER key. We saw a small amount of other stuff that hasn't been revealed, so I have to remain quiet about that.

In particular, we were not given any information with regard to the implementation of the calculator. But Richard and Wlodek presented papers regarding what needed fixing in the 33s, and what "nice to have" features they wanted. All of the attendees gave HP an earful on the same subjects as well. They seem to have listened to at least some of the advice they were offered then. To be fair, with a guy like Sam Kim guiding product generation, they may have come up with most of the ideas themselves. Without touching this calc, I can tell you I am 99% certain the build quality will be up to snuff in the eyes of this community, since Sam, an old time PPC member and "calculator geek" was involved. Kudos to him, and to everyone else at HP involved in bringing this machine to market.

There's just one problem I can see. My expectations of what you will produce next have been raised considerably. Of course, that's my problem, not yours. Way to go!


Regards
Howard


Quote:
But Richard and Wlodek presented papers regarding what needed fixing in the 33s, and what "nice to have" features they wanted. All of the attendees gave HP an earful on the same subjects as well. They seem to have listened to at least some of the advice they were offered then.

Hi, Howard --

"...presented papers?" Heck, the following thread from August 2004 would have (and actually seems to have) covered most of it! Oh well, whatever it took...

Now, if the complex-number functionality is implemented substantially as outlined in the September 2004 thread below, I'll demand consultant's fees and formal acknowledgement! (Just kidding).

-- KS


Edited: 29 May 2007, 1:42 a.m.


That is a pretty thorough analysis of what is wrong with the 33s, Karl. I don't know what processes Richard Nelson and Włodek Mier-Jędrzejowicz followed to arrive at the contents of their papers. They may well have read your post, or maybe not. The papers covered similar ground, of course, but with perhaps different emphases and styles. At any rate, the papers were indeed presented at the conference, and framed the discussion there regarding the 33s.

I'd be very interested to see you revisit your critique, comparing the new machine, once you get your hands on one.

Regards,
Howard

Quote:
... at last year's HHC conference... We saw a small amount of other stuff that hasn't been revealed, so I have to remain quiet about that.

I think the HP 35s is a fantastic step forwards, for which HP must be congratulated - it will sell a whole lot better than anything they have had on the books lately.

However, I showed the datasheet to a work colleague who I know prefers RPN calcs.
He was not that impressed, saying 'I like the small ones they used to make'

- like this ? ( my HP15c ) 'yes'.

Given the very middle road status of the older HP33S, and considering there are 4 financial models: This model seems like a #3 in the line model.
Can we expect an even more up market position #4 model before too long?


So, even though the dust hasn't settled on this one, any thoughts on the nature of, and which market segment the still to be 'revealed' items will fall ?

A premium professional, direct HP15C replacement, a la HP12C platinum.

or for the student market: a color competitor to the TI-NSPIRE uber-PDA with keys.

Has the HP48S ... HP50G line reached the natural end of it's development ?


Quote:
So, even though the dust hasn't settled on this one, any thoughts on the nature of, and which market segment the still to be 'revealed' items will fall ?

I feel free to speculate on this because we weren't given anything to chew on in that regard other than what I've already talked about.

My guess is they won't come out with a Voyager style machine. The reason is twofold. First in terms of features, the 35s seems to cover quite a bit more than the 15c in many respects. Where it is lacking in comparison with the 15c, it ought to be possible to make up for it with programming. (I.e., matrices, possibly.) That means there would be little to differentiate a Voyager form-factor calculator from the 35s. Of course, HP would be free to implement even more functions on such a machine, but that brings me to my second point. The 50G stands as a barrier to any midrange scientific in terms of adding features. If you enhance the midrange too much, it will start to cannibalize sales from the 50g. I think that's one reason you won't see USB or serial I/O on a midrange scientific. But oh, some removable flash would be nice! (BTW, I've noticed a fairly steep drop off in 48GX prices lately. I wonder if that's due to the 50g and its available enhancements?)

As far as the RPL models go, I think there's lots of room for improvement there. Memory prices continue to drop, and power efficiency per unit CPU cycle continue to rise, so hardware trade-off calculations will change over time. With 64 MB of RAM and a 1GHz processor, say, you could do quite a lot of interesting portable mathematics. (Mathematica/Maple/what have you in your palm?) At the interface of hardware and software, there's the whole issue of Saturn emulation. A native ARM implementation or a greatly enhanced emulation could lead to big performance gains. At the operating system level, there's the whole "port" architecture, which is a kludge to get around the limits of the Saturn address bus. Well, if you aren't emulating a Saturn, you can do away with that. SysRPL, like UserRPL is a magnificent language, fully general, and fun to use once you get over the steep learning curve. I'm sure that despite that, both dialects could be improved, and this offers another avenue for progress.

Regards,
Howard

My guess is that it's i, indirect access and j, imaginary part of a complex number.


Maybe prices on the classic HPs will be more reasonable on that auction site.

- k

Quote:
My guess is that it's i, indirect access and j, imaginary part of a complex number.

Or maybe like IJ on the HP-42S, for matrix indexing?


Hi,

    Self-quoting from this message I posted a few days ago:

      "[...]"ARG" (yellow), and "Theta" (blue), over and on the "i" key are obviously the functional equivalents of the R-P/P-R rectangular/polar
      conversions, as they probably input/return/display the components of a complex number either in rectangular form or polar form.
      Also "i" itself must surely be the way to specify the imaginary part in rectangular form, so all three related functions are very
      ergonomically placed on the same key.

      This being so, "(i)" and "(j)" must surely be used for indirect addressing, and they do correspond to 2 separate special registers which
      are both used to independently specify indirect addresses, Register (i) and Register (j).

      This would be very convenient, as having more than one register for indirect addressing is pretty useful in matrix programming, say.
      That's why the HP-41C/42S would support any register from 00 to 99 (and more using synthetic means) to be used for indirect
      addressing, while regrettably the HP-15C was limited to just one, the "(i)" register."


    i.e., (i) and (j) I are just two special registers mainly used for indirect addressing, instead of just one. I don't think the HP35s has any built-in matrix functions or matrix-specific capabilities.

Best regards from V.

I too tend to favour this interpretation.

- Pauli

Quote:
i.e., (i) and (j) I are just two special registers mainly used for indirect addressing, instead of just one. I don't think the HP35s has any built-in matrix functions or matrix-specific capabilities.

Yes, you're probably right. The 35s looks like it has at least *some* functions hidden in menus (the shifted functions on the cursor keys look like menus to me, and the flyer mentions menu and softkey functionality, too)... but there are no signs of any significant matrix support on that keyboard. *sigh* It's too bad... Having two index registers is better than having just one (implementing matrix code on the HP-67/97 and HP-19C/29C could be pretty painful because of this) but then again, having only 2 index registers is seriously lame compared to having 100 of them like on the HP-41 and 42S (never mind the TI-58/59 that started this trend!).
Awww, shucks.

- Thomas

Edited: 31 May 2007, 12:07 a.m.


Perhaps you can address that in Free35. Got an ETA?


Quote:
Perhaps you can address that in Free35. Got an ETA?

About 6 months after hell freezes over. I ain't doing no ALG mode nor no fractions! ;-)

- Thomas

Fantastic!!

I think HP is finally tapping into their heritage...part of which is the superior keyboard layout that Bill Hewlett and his original team put so much thought into. It's about time.

Now Mr. Hurd, take this concept across the board and make true HP's out of the entire model line.

Hal

Wow!

This seems almost too good to be true.

It looks like it extends the number of registers beyond the 26 lettered ones on the 33S (plus the stats registers that can be indirectly addressed). Lets hope that the number of program labels is correspondingly increased, ideally by alphanumeric strings for globals and numbers for locals, as in the 41C and 42S.

If the picture is to be believed, we have single line complex numbers, like with the 42S. And the keyboard layout and colours are most attractive.

I wonder what the pricing will be? Probably a bit more than the 33S, but I would expect not much more.

Maybe this will be the thank you gift at HHC2007?

Les

Dearest HP33s calculator, (a bit of humor)

I've met something new. It's a little older, and refined...but goodness, it's sleek! I can't stop thinking about it... Unlike you, it's comfortable with who it is- No! You know exactly what I'm talking about! For the last two years I feel like I've been dating a cellphone or...gasp- a PDA! I don't like the looks I've been getting from people since we've been together.

Don't take this the wrong way...I need more than 30-some REGisters! I feel like you've been holding out on me, what with all that MEMory. I won't be teased any longer! There's really nothing to ARGue about.

Sure we had some good times...but I'm often confused when I look at your face. There's too much going on there...besides, that shade of green (turquoise?) is all wrong for you. Don't frown at me like that! You always were a bit edgy... To be honest, I knew from the moment we ENTERed into this that it wouldn't really LAST. We'll always have final exams! :)

I won't even mind if the packaging features a couple of engineering students huddling over a desk that has a superimposed image of a 35s on it, lol :)

Whoo-hoo! The return of HP Calculators is here!

The French part of the SMS's website is claiming availability in Summer 2007 (and July '07 for the HP10S).

Regards

--Vincent

Finalmente!

This comment in Italian shows that I waited too long for this new calculator. I hope it will satisfy us all.

I plan to buy 2. Just in case.

-- Antonio


Quote:
I plan to buy 2. Just in case.
Excellent idea to get a second 35s after the bugs are all out ;-).

Anyone remember my 35s design a couple of years ago? I never thought HP could beat it :^). I'm glad they did.

Will buy one for sure.

BTW, when it's out, eB*y prices for the 32S(II) will drop by 50% at least in the first few month I bet.


Whew, I was bidding just yesterday for a 32SII around 100 EUR, but I was outbid...

What a lucky day ;-)

Giancarlo


And I was about to put my spare 32SII and sealed manual on eBay yesterday...

Should I do it right now or wait a little longer? :-)

Regards,

Gerson.


Neither... set a reasonable price and sell it in the classifieds here on the MoHPC site. :)


Quote:
Neither... set a reasonable price and sell it in the classifieds here on the MoHPC site. :)

What's a reasonable price? I might be willing to part with one of my 32's because of the 35s.

Quote:
What's a reasonable price?

I wish that question had an easy answer.

Consider the condition and whether you'll be including a manual or case. Look at recently ended auctions/sales for the same item. Consider how much you value knowing that by selling it here you will probably bring someone joy.

In the last month, I've seen them go for nearly $200, I've seen them go for $50.

Maybe wait until the price of the 35s is revealed, and sell it for that amount plus shipping & a small profit. If I were to find one today at a garage sale for a buck, that's probably what I'd do.

Best wishes,

Alex

Quote:

What's a reasonable price? I might be willing to part with one of my 32's because of the 35s.


I'd happily pay $100.00. I'd swallow hard and pay up to $300.00. I doubt they will go that high, considering the competitive landscape. (They are the underdog, needing to convince users of an entrenched competitor's product to switch if they want to gain share.) The 33s lists for $50.00, and the 50g for $150.00. So $100.00 list would split that difference down the middle.

Regards,
Howard

Has your 32Sii the orange/blue shift keys, or the teal/white keys?


Quote:
Has your 32Sii the orange/blue shift keys, or the teal/white keys?

Mine are orange/blue; vintage 1993.

Hola Andrés,

Just to answer your question,
mine is the brown bezel model, that is, the one with orange and blue shift keys.

Best regards,

Gerson.


Edited: 30 May 2007, 7:09 p.m.

Quote:
Anyone remember my 35s design a couple of years ago? I never thought HP could beat it :^). I'm glad they did.
Thomas, feel free to lay down our mutual design work for a while! d;-)

Quote:
Thomas, feel free to lay down our mutual design work for a while! d;-)
I knew there was something left to do! ;-)

Quote:

Excellent idea to get a second 35s after the bugs are all out ;-).

Anyone remember my 35s design a couple of years ago? I never thought HP could beat it :^). I'm glad they did.


Was that a hardware design?
Details please?

I'm glad HP didn't scoop my new calculator design! Coincidently I just got my PCB's back today, glad I didn't just have to toss them straight in the bin!

Dave.


Quote:
Was that a hardware design?
Can't find it right now, sorry. It was simply a (private) case design study. I tried to keep it as simple as possible, retaining classic design elements only where they don't interfere function.

In the end, I've chosen to place the LCD in topmost position and to bevel the bottom edge, placing the HP logo there.

The actual 35s is way more related to the classics in terms of design. I like it :-).

Here's an image


Edited: 29 May 2007, 8:47 a.m.


Quote:

Here's an image


Cute!
I really like the slim shape and the button style.
Although I'm afraid it wouldn't get my money, it doesn't have a dedicated EXP key. If the HYP and Ab/c keys were changed to EXP and SQRT then we're talking.
Oh, bugger it, I'll have one anyway, it's sexy :->

Why couldn't the real HP35S have cursor keys like that?

Dave.

Gee, they must've rehired the guy that designed the HP65/67 - lotsa design cues there.

My compliments, HP, for listening to folks here and bringing back Big Enter and losing the 'chevron' layout.

And at the very least we have a physical platform that can be changed.

We could put a 41/42S emulator inside - the actual key legends are not too crazy for this purpose, and a new, quality overlay for shifted function legends could readily be manufactured in small quantities.

Whee! It's a pretty good calc, and we have the mechanical handiwork done for us so all we need to do is new firmware if we want a certain style of calc.

BTW, the Sunplus SPLB31 is a flavor of a 65C02...


Bill Wiese

San Jose, CA


Quote:
We could put a 41/42S emulator inside - the actual key legends are not too crazy for this purpose, and a new, quality overlay for shifted function legends could readily be manufactured in small quantities.

Please note standard overlays will hide the golden print only, leaving the blue visible. Using slightly more flexible material, however, simple overlays may be made also covering the slanted key fronts with something like a flap, one flap per key. Then, we are really free to change the shifted functions.

But let's get the original first at least once before changing it! I'm really looking forward to this model d:-)

Any information about prices yet?


Edited: 29 May 2007, 7:40 a.m.

Hi Bill,


Quote:
We could put a 41/42S emulator inside

Is there I/O capability - I don't see any reference to either IR or RS-232 connection or Memory Card Slot.


Quote:
BTW, the Sunplus SPLB31 is a flavor of a 65C02...

I'm assuming you're referring to the CPU. Where'd you get that info.

Me thinks you have some inside info..... :)

Can't wait to see the actual unit. As Carly Simon says "Anticipation" ...

Bill


Hi, Bill:

Bill posted:

    ""BTW, the Sunplus SPLB31 is a flavor of a 65C02...
    I'm assuming you're referring to the CPU. Where'd you get that info."

      If you mean the "SPLB31", it's actually specified in the brochure whose link is provided in the very first post of this thread, under "HP35s Specifications" -> "CPU" -> SPLB31A.

      That's the same CPU as the HP33S, by the way, and you can find further technical info on it here.

Best regards from V.

Hi Valentin,

Quote:
it's actually specified in the brochure

Just looked and it's the second line right after the HP Part Number. Don't know how I missed it. Gotta get that second cup of coffee.

Now - can anyone confirm whether there is any I/O capability?

Bill


Quote:
Now - can anyone confirm whether there is any I/O capability?

Well, I'd say confirmation will have to wait until someone gets hardware in their hands, or HP puts up some additional information. So for now, you'll have to settle for pure speculation:

Evidence and/or factors suggesting it will have I/O:

  • One giant drawback to the 33s is lack of I/O, and HP seems to have listened to most of the suggestions/demands for improvements to the 33s. So maybe HP might also provide I/O in the 35s.
  • I/O functions could easily be included in a menu accessed by the MEM function (e.g., Archive and Restore commands)
  • no mention of NCEES on the "Permitted for use on" line.
  • Surveying is listed on the "Subject suitability" line. My understanding is that surveying is data intensive and there has historically been a vibrant industry in developing programs, both of which would certainly benefit from I/O.


    Evidence and/or factors suggesting it will not have I/O:

  • no mention of I/O on the spec sheet. I/O is a pretty major feature to leave off of the list.
  • no mention of an I/O cable on the "What's in the box" line.
  • I/O might be the feature that is the "line in the sand" between the scientific models and graphing models.

  • Quote:
    Hi, Bill:

    Bill posted:

      ""BTW, the Sunplus SPLB31 is a flavor of a 65C02...
      I'm assuming you're referring to the CPU. Where'd you get that info."

      [ul]If you mean the "SPLB31", it's actually specified in the brochure whose link is provided in the very first post of this thread, under "HP35s Specifications" -> "CPU" -> SPLB31A.

      That's the same CPU as the HP33S, by the way, and you can find further technical info on it here.


    It does not say it has Flash ROM, and even if it did it would not surprise me if HP ordered a Mask ROM version. That means the code can't be changed. But it would still be possible to hack the machine with an equivalent flash ROM processor to run custom software for those who are that keen on changing things, if there is space inside that is. Should be enough room though, it's thick enough!

    Dave.


    Quote:
    But it would still be possible to hack the machine with an equivalent flash ROM processor

    Not easily. Assuming that it is constructed similarly to other recent HP calculators, the processor is mounted using Chip-on-Board (CoB) assembly, where the die is attached directly to the PCB, wire-bonded, and covered with a blob of epoxy. It's not possible to simply desolder the chip and solder in a replacement.

    Once upon a time, I asked someone at HP about the possibility of buying an OEM version of the HP 49G with no HP logo and no key legends, and was told that it was probably possible even in relatively low volumes (e.g., quantity 1000). If someone is serious about selling a calculator with custom firmware, this might be worth pursuing for a newer model such as the 50g or 35s. For the 35s, though, such an OEM model would presumably be delivered with *no* processor, and the volume would probably have to be significantly higher.

    Well, I'm planning to buy at least two of these anyways. But, I think we owe it to ourselves to make modification kits by replacing the PCB, popping in a more powerful CPU, emulating the 41c, adding USB support, and then dealing with key labels.

    I strongly doubt HP will be molding the key legends, which leaves them open to stripping and silk screening. Judging by the thickness of he enclosure, it should be possible to fit in some much higher capacity batteries.

    Or judging by how well they've done with this 35s, we could just ask HP if they're already planning something along these lines as well as a 15s. :-)

    -Hugh

    Quote:
    Finalmente!

    This comment in Italian...


    To yours I will add the equivalent comment in Portuguese:

    Finalmente!

    [fee.now.'menchy], as it's pronounced here :-)

    I will buy only one. I hope the keys will last long enough and the trig bug is fixed... unless they want to commemorate that as well :-)

    Regards,

    Gerson.

    Hi all:

      Very nice-looking machine, and what a surprise, I was also expecting some existing calc relabeled as "35th Anniversary" !

      I'll certainly get a couple of them (or more if the price's right, to present them to selected people), if only for writing programs for it and articles about it. As it seems some of the nastiest software and hardware annoyances of the HP33S (which prevented me from buying it in the first place) have been corrected, this surely will be both interesting and enjoyable.

      Some random thoughts, after inspecting the keyboard and brochure:

      • The 800+ storage registers might be addressed like this:
              Register 00 to Register 99  =  100 registers
        Register A to Register Z = 26 registers
        Register AA to Register ZZ = 676 registers
        Register (i) and (j) = 2 registers
        ----------------
        804 registers
        This would cater for 800+ registers, all of them *directly* addressable (as well as indirectly, of course), and would provide compatibility both for classic calculator's programs (R00-R99) as well as HP33S' programs (RA-RZ).

        If this addressing scheme is indeed used for direct storage register addressing, it seems to me quite possible that it's also used for label addressing, so it would support up to 802 labels, namely LBL 00 to LBL 99, LBL A to LBL Z, LBL AA to LBL ZZ. This would be more than enough for 32 Kb worth of program code.

      • Even 800+ registers only take 6.5 Kb, at 8 bytes per register. As 32 Kb seem to be available, that would mean that most of it can only be used for program storage but not for data storage, unless the 800+ register count only refers to *directly addressable* registers, as outlined above, but you can have nearly 4,000 of them *indirectly* addressable and this is simply not mentioned in the add because 800+ is more than enough and mentioning indirect addressing would incur in too much specific technical details for such a simple brochure.

      • "ARG" (yellow), and "Theta" (blue), over and on the "i" key are obviously the functional equivalents of the R-P/P-R rectangular/polar conversions, as they probably input/return/display the components of a complex number either in rectangular form or polar form. Also "i" itself must surely be the way to specify the imaginary part in rectangular form, so all three related functions are very ergonomically placed on the same key.

      • This being so, "(i)" and "(j)" must surely be used for indirect addressing, and they do correspond to 2 separate special
        registers which are both used to independently specify indirect addresses, Register (i) and Register (j).

        This would be very convenient, as having more than one register for indirect addressing is pretty useful in matrix programming, say. That's why the HP-41C/42S would support any register from 00 to 99 (and more using synthetic means) to be used for indirect addressing, while regrettably the HP-15C was limited to just one, the "(i)" register.

        I don't think that "(i)" and "(j)" have anything to do with built-in matrix functionality, which I think is absent, but sure I would like to be proved wrong on this.

      • INTG seems to me to be "Integer Part", as the INTEGRAL functionality seems to be the "integral" character over the EQN key. If that's so, it might be possible that the square-brackets symbol "[]" is actually the "Fractional Part" operation, though perhaps it might be used for additional purposes depending on the context or mode.

      • LOGIC must surely be a menu, including such logical operators as AND, OR, XOR, NOT, etc., while BASE is obviously another menu including base-n operations/conversions.

      Now, let's hope the physical quality is adequate, most specially the keyboard if nothing else, and we're all set up for an interesting ride again ! This is what the HP33S should have been !! :-)

    Best regards from V.

    Edited: 29 May 2007, 6:07 a.m.


    Excellent news!!!!

    I would only regret that R/S and E+ have they traditional positions swapped..

    I think I will buy at least three: one for keeping, one for regular use, and one to replace an aging 32Sii my daughter uses all the time at her engineering school. Only hope the price will be not too high (specially in my country).

    From now on, the 33S will remain at my office, on an unlocked desk drawer.

    Quote:
    If this addressing scheme is indeed used for direct storage register addressing, it seems to me quite possible that it's also used for label addressing, so it would support up to 802 labels, namely LBL 00 to LBL 99, LBL A to LBL Z, LBL AA to LBL ZZ. This would be more than enough for 32 Kb worth of program code.

    Valentin, I really hope your analysis is correct, but I must admit I am not going to rush out and buy one until I start seeing some reviews here in the months to come.

    It would break my heart to have 31KB of memory and 800 storage registers yet still a measly 26 labels, as in the 33s. I really hope that the number of labels is generous, and, ideally labels can be reused in different programs, just as they can on the 41C and 42S.

    I do like the look of it--its slight curves on the side are certainly reminiscent of Classics, Woodstocks, and the 41 series. If the unit is a bit thicker at the top vs. the bottom, I will enjoy that classic profile too.

    Les


    Quote:
    If the unit is a bit thicker at the top vs. the bottom, I will enjoy that classic profile too.

    Les, I hope this can give you an idea:

    For the original picture, look for Cyrille's post at the related www.comp.sys.hp48 thread.

    Best regards,

    Gerson.

    Edited: 30 May 2007, 9:56 p.m.


    Yup, good ol' wedge shape. At the risk of a terrible irreverence to the memory of Bill Hewett and all the other great souls of early HP calculator lore, I always though those machines would make great door stops if they ever stopped working. But of course, they seldom did ..

    8)

    Regards,
    Howard

    P.S. The original picture Gerson refers to shows a novel and innovative use of the 35s. I can't think of any precedent for it, in fact. Quite an unusual machine, indeed.


    Quote:
    P.S. The original picture Gerson refers to shows a novel and innovative use of the 35s. I can't think of any precedent for it, in fact. Quite an unusual machine, indeed.

    Little cuty has no idea how lucky he is!

    Inre: photo showing side of 35s

    What's the piece of tape doing there?

    Have you already peeled off the back label to look inside?

    Have you dropped it? !!!!!

    Have you already lost the battery cover?

    Ink Wiring Mines Juan Two No! (Inquiring minds want to know)

    B^)

    Ren

    dona nobis pacem


    The picture in Gerson's post was extracted from the one found
    here

    I think the tape is holding it to the colorful plastic pieces suspending the calculator above the lucky infant.


    Edited: 31 May 2007, 4:22 p.m.


    Oh...

    So, I guess that means the 35s doesn't have a caribiner attach point?

    B^)

    Ren

    dona nobis pacem

    Hi, Valentin --

    You've posted some insightful thoughts. I'll elaborate a bit with some of my own considerations.

    I've believed (and posted here) that the ideal mid-range (i.e., less sophisticated than the HP-42S) non-graphing scientific calculator would combine the best of the HP-32SII and the HP-15C. The HP-32SII paradigm provided a great starting point, but the immediate challenge is to incorporate the missing functionality that is present in the HP-15C: Matrix calculations, mathematically-complete and convenient complex-number functions, and INTEG-within-SOLVE and vice-versa.

    I've thought about how all that would be done, and have failed to devise satisfactory resolutions that would provide consistent and intuitive usage. This is why I'm eager to see the finalized HP-35s.

    Matrix functionality:

    Quote:
    I don't think that "(i)" and "(j)" have anything to do with built-in matrix functionality, which I think is absent, but sure I would like to be proved wrong on this.

    The basic problem within the HP-32SII paradigm is the identification of matrices. Consider that the HP-15C offers only numbered registers for scalars, while matrices are identified with a single-letter A-E. Thus, there is no confusion between scalars and matrices. The HP-42S offers full alphanumeric naming capability, and a flexible stack with plenty of free RAM that accommodates different kinds of objects.

    The HP-32SII/HP-33S, on the other hand, offer storage registers denoted by single letters without full alphanumerics or an ALPHA mode. Another dimension is the equation functionality that was lifted from the algebraic HP-22S.

    • How would a scalar be distinguished from a matrix?
    • Could matrices be utilized in equations?

    These questions have ramifications about how functions work, consistency, and breadth of capability. For example, if a single-letter variable had been redimensioned as a matrix, programs and equations could fail to execute for unobvious reasons. Simple commutativity of multiplication would not hold, leading to possibly erroneous results. (Granted, the same kind of pitfalls could occur on an HP-42S, but that's more sophisticated, and equations would not be an issue.)

    Expanded registers and labels:

    Quote:
    (...Register 00 to Register 99 ... Register AA to Register ZZ... LBL 00 to LBL 99 ... LBL AA to LBL ZZ)

    Numbered registers and numeric labels, as well as two-letter labels, have been requested in the name of additional capability and fuller usage of RAM. In fact, why not, for example, A1 and T9 as registers and labels? The questions are:

    • How to provide these without employing an ALPHA mode or requiring extra keystrokes for single-letter variables?
    • If ALPHA mode must be provided, why impose a limit of two characters?
    • How to utilize 0-9 when their keys are assigned to letters?

    For example, how would a value be stored to, or recalled from, variable "TA" unde the existing paradigm -- 'RCL T RCL A' couldn't be distinguished from 'RCL T' followed by 'RCL A' unless something else was done.

    As for the last question, a trick from the HP-41 could be borrowed, with STO or RCL being followed by either shift key to access 0-9.

    Complex numbers, angles and polar<->rectangular:

    Quote:
    "ARG" (yellow), and "Theta" (blue), over and on the "i" key are obviously the functional equivalents of the R-P/P-R rectangular/polar conversions, as they probably input/return/display the components of a complex number either in rectangular form or polar form.

    You may be right, but the ARG function on RPL models is essentially an "ATAN2" function that provides only the angle of a complex number given in rectangular form. The magnitude is calculated separately using ABS (unless a switch to POLAR mode is made on HP-48 and above, in which case the entire stack of complex numbers is converted.

    It would be a shame if the only way to perform a full conversion is to enter the number as complex-valued. This would be unintuitive to many users, and would represent a reduction of functionality from the HP-15C and HP-42S, for which P->R and R->P would work on two real-valued inputs or one complex-valued input. Oftentimes, the components must be separated or be calculated separately prior to "assembly", which brings me to the next point:

    Will the RPL functions C->R and R->C be available on the HP-35s? The HP-15C offers R->C as "f I"; the HP-42S kludges the two functions together as the "COMPLEX" function printed on the faceplate. ("COMPLEX" on the HP-42S, incidentally, works quite differently from the way "COMPLEX" works on the HP-33S and predecessor HP-32S/SII -- a "Simon says" command prefix that I hope is gone for good on the HP-35s.)

    Modification/extraction of floating-point numbers:

    Quote:
    INTG seems to me to be "Integer Part", as the INTEGRAL functionality seems to be the "integral" character over the EQN key. If that's so, it might be possible that the square-brackets symbol "[]" is actually the "Fractional Part" operation, though perhaps it might be used for additional purposes depending on the context or mode.

    The INTG function on the HP-33S returns the next lower integer, as opposed to the closest one. It is separate from IP, INT/, and integration. It's possible that INTG (and maybe ARG ?) could represent menus. One detail from the HP-42S, HP-32S, and HP-32SII is that the faceplate legends denoting menus were highlighted by a darker background. This detail was lost on the HP-33S.


    It's important to remember that the HP-35s illustration looks like a virtual image, not a photo of a physical calculator. There may be further changes before it is publicly available, and I'm very curious what the end result will be.

    -- KS


    Edited: 4 June 2007, 1:38 a.m. after one or more responses were posted


    Karl,

    as usual, you posted quite some valuable imput. Based on the questions you (and others in this thread) have raised, let me point out that there is a big amount of speculation and/or phantasy in whatever is written about those operations of the HP35s being not really evident. So far, nobody (except the guys of HP) knows all of the acronyms visible on the picture, or which one represents a menu or a single command, we can only guess extrapolating our knowledge of earlier models.

    The only facts we know are those written in the ad sheet (showing some differences between the English and French version already). And we think we know many of the prints we see on the keys and plate of the new calc.

    1. The probability is almost 100% that e.g. SIN will be the well known trigonometric function again. EQN, MODE, DISPLAY, FLAGS, MEM and CONST will probably be menus as well as LOGIC, BASE, L.R., SUMS, x?y, x?0, and the shifted operations of "+" and EQN. But, to start with something very basic, how are you going to select a menu item easily without menu keys (or some keys you can use instead like the top row on 42s and more Pioneers)? There are only 4 candidates for such a task in the top row of HP35s, and that's too less IMHO. I hope they do not follow the CASIO-approach to menus, but who knows? And how shall you exit a menu called erroneously without EXIT?
    2. There are a number of commands we miss, like INT and FRAC, RECT and POLAR, or EXIT, as just mentioned. And the English text mentions explicitely a cube root I do not see anywhere on the picture.
    3. And furthermore, there are a number of ambiguous items, at least for me, where I am not sure about their meaning and what they represent (menus or commands), like INTG, blue-shifted SIGMA+, gold-shifted "0", the brackets etc. Even "i" may be used for complex number input and indirect addressing, for example, plus who-knows-what.

    One final example: I would guess HYP is a menu, because IMO it's painful to be forced to press "<-" SIN "->" SIN (i.e. HYP ASIN) for ASINH, but that's only an educated guess.

    Exactly that was the reason why - in an earlier post of this thread - I offered 95 points for the person discovering the owner's manual (and making it accessible online, of course :) Until then, I regard lengthy speculations about the functionality of this new calc not being very effective.

    Regards, Walter


    Well, I remember the HP-33S, when it was shown the first time, had a different keyboard than the marketed model. I guess the same could be for the HP-35S. And so, some uneasy combination could be modified for the final assembly.

    The model shown in the English pdf seems complete, but surely, as you observed, it could be bettered.

    -- Antonio

    Quote:
    .. how are you going to select a menu item easily without menu keys ..

    The 33s uses the stupid 4-way directional toggle at the top center. The 35s no doubt uses the arrow keys for this.

    Quote:
    And how shall you exit a menu called erroneously without EXIT?

    The 33s uses the ON key (labeled "C") for this. I'm 95% sure the 35s will use the same key.

    Quote:
    Until then, I regard lengthy speculations about the functionality of this new calc not being very effective.

    Ah, but that ignores the fact that for many of us, such speculation is fun. 8)

    Regards,
    Howard

    The 33s method for selecting menu items may be used. It did not use menu keys but numbered choices for items in a menu.

    This brief is somehow enthusiastic. It has a small chronology for the 35 years.

    In time: this is going to be the first celebrating model everyone can have for a, say, affordable price.

    Cheers.

    Luiz

    PS: I have never seen so too many posts and followups about the same subject in such a short time... Do we have a new record here?


    Ola Luiz!

    Quote:
    This brief is somehow enthusiastic. It has a small chronology for the 35 years.

    IMO a big part of it is a translation of this article.

    Cumprimentos, Walter


    Olá, Walter;

    Obrigado, eu não soube desse artigo (Thanks, I did not know about this article). I've been so running-out-of-time I can't tell...

    Cumprimentos, Luiz (Brazil)


    The Time Line is impressive but wrong on two counts :

    - 1979 : the HP41 is not the first alphanumeric programmable calculator, the Sharp EL5100 predates it (at least), there were certainly others.

    - 2007 : It is merely impossible that the HP10S be the first scientific calculator with both solar and battery power. Even the HP6S predates it, not to mention vintage Toshiba (and others).


    BTW I am buying 3 of this one.

    It seems metal faceplate, classic RPN, build quality and all such much liked features are back.

    I wish there is some 42S lineage showing in this beast. We'll see.

    Not sure but here the el-5100 is listed as from 1981 vintage.

    Greetings,
    Massimo

    P.S. But here is marked as from 1979... who knows for sure its intro date?

    Edited: 29 May 2007, 1:20 p.m.

    It looks a lot better than I expected, but they still had to spoil it with those ugly cursor keys. :-(


    Quote:
    It looks a lot better than I expected, but they still had to spoil it with those ugly cursor keys. :-(

    Yes, shame about the cursor keys. They could have put in 4 regular looking keys with exactly the same functionality. Perhaps marketing stood firm on this one and the design engineers had to cave in on something to keep them happy?

    Dave.


    How about we wait and see what they do before we complain too much


    Quote:
    How about we wait and see what they do before we complain too much

    If anyone from HP is reading this thread, perhaps they'll take the complaints to heart before they put this into production. As it stands right now, though it's a big improvement over their other current models, I still wouldn't buy one.


    Let's be honest here, realistically you are never going to be happy.

    Why is there a Backspace key?
    Couldn't the left arrow key have done the same job?

    I propose changing the Backspace key to a Log key. Any objections?

    Dave.

    Overall, the 35s looks better than anything HP has made in at least 15 years. My only wish is that before production they will swap the positions of sqrt, y^x, 1/x, with RCL, ROLL, SWAP.


    Hi Hugh,

    Quote:
    swap the positions of sqrt, y^x, 1/x, with RCL, ROLL, SWAP

    When I took look at this, I noticed the STO is a shifted function - OUCH! And it's a Blue Shift, not a Yellow Shift as I would think it would be. For everyday calculations, I use the STO/RCL keys very heavily. Have the STO as a Shift would be a real pain.

    I guess to make up all happy, what is really needed is a fully re-assignable keyboard. Then we could each configure it how we like. Of course, would need some way to re-label them.

    Still, I'm looking forward to giving it a test drive.

    Bill

    Edited: 29 May 2007, 11:11 a.m.


    Quote:
    Have the STO as a Shift would be a real pain.

    Have you read Paul Guertin's opinion here, just a few days ago (22 May 2007, 8:18 p.m.)?

    http://www.hpmuseum.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/hpmuseum/forum.cgi?read=114508#114508

    His point makes a lot of sense to me.

    Regards,

    Gerson.


    Edited: 29 May 2007, 9:18 p.m.

    Hugh,

    may I quote yourself?

    Quote:
    How about we wait and see what they do before we complain too much


    P.S. You can imagine I have some *scary* wishes for keyboard modifications, too, but (1) there is quite some guessing in the discussion still, (2) I would like to give it a try first (see above), (3) I agree with Bill in the matter of a fully assignable keyboard.

    Size (L x W x D) 15.8 x 8.2 x 1.82 cm (6.22 x 3.23 x 0.72 in)

    Seems a little big for my shirt pocket's taste. Perfect for my desk top though. My 32S is about 1/2" shorter, 3/16" narrower, and 1/4" thinner (didn't want to look up the real numbers).


    On the size issue, it IS an anniversary model...but then again, we wouldn't cheer if it had a '70-era chip set either :)

    On the SHIFTed STO key, I use this frequently as well, but it doesn't compare to my dismay as I left my college bookstore and noticed the x^3, as well as the x^2 not being a SHIFTed root(x) key. That was painful!

    This new machine looks beautiful, and brings back the clear color scheme and the large ENTER key. YES!

    ECL


    Another thing on the thickness:

    I recall the older HPs had a slight tilt built in, so the user could clearly see/read it on the desk without having to hunch over the keyboard...could this be part of the reason for T=0.73"?

    Also, this is just the thickest part. It doesn't necessarily mean that the whole machine is that thick, right?

    Hoping for something awesome! Did anyone else notice the notes in the PDF: Something to the effect of "Be confident that every calculation is reliable...etc."

    Sounding better by the minute!

    ECL


    Quote:
    Also, this is just the thickest part. It doesn't necessarily mean that the whole machine is that thick, right?

    I think you're probably right. It's probably shaped to recall the classic Woodstocks, without being identical to them. I note many of the design cues: the "bare metal" strips on the sides, the color scheme, the keys, etc. So, probably, the shape as well, if not the weight -- it only takes two lithium coin cells, like the 33S, so it will probably weigh approximately the same as a 33S. Ah well, we can open it and put some weight inside. ;)

    I also note that it appears that the sides rise above the plane of the keypad, which is welcome; that will serve to partially protect the keys from accidental presses and wear.


    Quote:
    I also note that it appears that the sides rise above the plane of the keypad, which is welcome; that will serve to partially protect the keys from accidental presses and wear.

    The sales brochure linked to at the top of this thread calls this out as a feature twice.

    Regards,
    Howard

    Quote:
    ...we wouldn't cheer if it had a '70-era chip set either :)

    I would. For an anniversary edition, I'd rather they made an exact replica of the original HP-35, with the limitations, bugs and all, so that the only way anyone could tell them apart would be by the serial numbers. But the 35s is a step in the right direction for what I'd like the new (non-anniversary-edition) HP calculators to be.


    Right. They'd really spend a huge amount of R&D to redesign something long obsolete that no-one would buy. That makes great business sense.


    Quote:
    Right. They'd really spend a huge amount of R&D to redesign something long obsolete that no-one would buy. That makes great business sense.

    I know they wouldn't do that. That's why I dislike HP so much: They care more about making "business sense" and money than about upholding their own traditions. I don't expect anything better from most companies, but HP should be better than that. I expect more from them than from any other company on earth -- even though I know they're never going to live up to either my own expectations or their own past.


    Dude,

    I am afraid you are becoming nonsensical. Traditions? It is a business, and no business survives on traditions--all survive on profit. Traditions are utilized only when they foster profit.

    Why on earth do you hold HP to this artificial unrealistic religious standard? Perhpas you forget that not all that long ago, both Hewlett and Packard were in the top 5 on the Forbes 400 list of the wealthiest Americans. Clearly they put profit right at the top of their thinking. You can't survive in any business if you put profit after tradition.


    Years ago (in the '70s and '80s) I used to see lots of articles in trade magazines criticizing HP's lack of "business sense." Business analysts complained about how HP put too much emphasis on engineering and not enough on sales and marketing. HP was depicted as being run by engineers who were in love with technology for its own sake and who cared more about impressing other engineers with "neat and cool" features than about profits. (One of these writers described someone taking an old car and turning it into a hot rod with all kinds of unnecessary "bells and whistles" that did nothing to make the car more practical for street use. He said, "That's an HP engineer's dream car.") Many of the HP people I came into contact with during that period (mostly HP support technicians for their minicomputer systems) fit into that image quite well. (One of them gave me the source code to a "practical joke" program to run on the system consoles. It masqueraded as the standard command interface and confused the heck out of our operators by giving all sorts of bizarre responses to ordinary commands. When they reported problems to me, I would hit a keystroke combination that disabled the program and say, "What's your problem? It works fine when I do it." Then I'd re-enable it and leave the room. I really had them going for awhile until one of them figured it out. :-)

    Criticism of that sort helped cement my loyalty to HP. That cement was chipped away over the last decade or two by HP's "new" attitude.

    Quote:
    Traditions are utilized only when they foster profit.

    If that's what you believe, then there's no point in us discussing this any further. For me, tradition outweighs nearly everything else in nearly every aspect of life.

    Quote:
    You can't survive in any business if you put profit after tradition.

    I respect and admire stubborn determination to maintain one's principles and traditions at any cost, even at the cost of survival, far more than I value so-called "success." But then, I've always considered those who take valiant stands in lost causes, and those who "go down with the ship" rather than admit defeat, to be superior to the rest of us.

    I wonder if they will release a limited "anniversary edition" with a special logo because I would hate to buy 2 hp-35s when they come out and 2 months later discover the release of an anniversary edition. Does anyone know anything about this ?


    The accepted date of introduction for the HP-35 is February 1,1972, although there seems to be some indication that some within HP think it was July 1, 1972. Either way, it is doubtful that the 35s will hit the streets before July 1, 2007, so the actual 35th anniversary date will have passed. It would not make sense to then introduce a 35th Anniversary Special Edition at a still later date. However, that does not mean that they won't do it. Maximizing potential sales would suggest that they do just that.


    Just curious. Is there any way to save programs entered into the HP-33s? Infra-red? Do you lose the programs when you change batteries? It has always bugged me that when I customize a program that it gets lost when changing batteries - I'd like to have a way to refer to work that I did earlier.

    Will the HP-35s, since it seems to be somewhat derivative of the HP-33s, also likely have no way to save the programs one may write? Seems a shame not to be able to backup that 32K of memory. ;-)


    Quote:
    Just curious. Is there any way to save programs entered into the HP-33s?



    Nope. A much discussed, much bemoaned shortcoming.

    Quote:
    Do you lose the programs when you change batteries?

    The 33s has two batteries. If you change them one at a time, you are not supposed to lose any programs or data.

    Quote:
    Will the HP-35s, since it seems to be somewhat derivative of the HP-33s, also likely have no way to save the programs one may write?



    Unknown at this time. See this message and others for further discussion.

    I just enquired about one of these and was advised that availability may be as late as September (possibly sooner) and the price between £54.99 and £59.99, although maybe a little cheaper online.

    This is the first HP calculator in years that has been even remotely tempting and I will almost certainly go for one (subject to reviews here of course) as a replacement for the 'classic' machines I currently use.

    Edited: 1 June 2007, 3:10 p.m.


    Quote:
    the price between £54.99 and £59.99

    Isn't this approximately the same as the current UK price for the 33S ?

    If so, then perhaps the 35S will be priced comparably to the current price of the 33S in the US and other countries as well.

    Edited: 1 June 2007, 8:53 p.m.

    Is it a game, isn't it?! All of the links aren't works and pics seems to me a low quality rendered pics from an older release of AutoCAD (a pics the calc on a writed paper VERY POOR: shadows and texture of the surface without ANY reality - like a home work from a low-end design-school).


    Best regards from V.

    Hi,

    my first post here.

    Certainly its not a hoax! Already in april when HP launched a customer video-contest in order to honour the HP-35 launch 35 years ago, there was a statements from a HP-spokesman that they will launch a new calculator.


    http://www.computerworld.com/blogs/node/5323

    At the same time the HP-33s becomes somewhat rare at certain US-discounters. Coincident ???

    Also, as other forum members already mentioned, at the time when the new HP-35s data sheet has been displayed on the european distributors page, the HP-33s was taken away.

    Since HPs strategy to design a simple programable scientific calculator (33s) specially for the US exams w/o any I/O proofed to be successful, it is logical to come up with a successor dealing with all shortcomings the HP-33s has. I guess the critics from students about the limited number of registers must have been loud enough to be heard even by HP. And here the new model comes with 800+ registers. In my eyes this is by far the most important improvment over the HP-33s. Beside the more old-HP-like design and improved keyboard layout I cant see much better specs compared to the HP-33s. What I really can´t understand is the fact that the HP-35s still seems to lack a build-in function to deal with matrices! Calculating with matrices has been one of the most frequent tasks when I was student (mechanical engineering) back in the the 90´s. My faithful HP-28s saved me hours of manual work on paper when I had to solve huge equation-systems. I still have this HP-28s and will never ever give it away. He served me so well and earned his retirement (lying in the drawer with removed batteries).

    Half a year ago when I decided to buy a new RPN-HP I thought I could get a kind of HP-42s for more daily number crunching without the need of graphics and a better scale factor. I really was surprised when I had to learn that there was only one calculator left in the HP-range which matched my specs: the HP-33s. I had not been following what happened to HP calculators since I bought my HP-28s back in 1991! But since RPN was a Must for me, the HP-33s was the only calculator left to buy. And I must confess it is not THAT bad. OK, HP is still far far away from its qualty design it ones used to come up with. And I guess it never will get back there. The old design teams and with them the HP-spirit vanished for good. But lets give the new HP calcualtor division a fair chance to show what the can go for. The HP-35s is a step in the right direction. I will buy one!

    Greetings, Frank


    > He served me so well...



    Is it a "HE" ? Mine are "IT"s...


    Quote:
    > He served me so well...

    Is it a "HE" ? Mine are "IT"s...


    IMHO as long as he writes better English than you German, I propose to neglect some errors if they do not distort the meaning.

    Quote:
    as long as he writes better English than you German, I propose to neglect some errors if they do not distort the meaning.

    I couldn't have said it better! I am constantly amazed and impressed with the excellent writing skills of the people on this forum. Being well-aware of the diverse nationalities behind many of these posting, it is amazing (to me anyway) how crystal-clear the meaning and intent of the messages come through, especially from those friends here whose primary language isn't English. I'm not kidding, it makes me try harder to make sure my writing is understandable. My sincerest compliments to you.


    I have some German collegues that, when we need to troubleshoot different control systems or understand the interactions between automated equipment, will often refer to one machine as "him" or the other as "he". This really simplifies the understanding of the communication signals that are being exchanged between each other (as though they were people having a conversation). I find it refreshing to discuss these technical details in such a "human-like" manner.

    Take care,
    Matt


    I also use "he" or "she" sometimes when referring to machines, and I'm a native English speaker.

    Of course I'm also a technophilic weirdo who spends more time with computers than with people, but that's beside the point. 8)

    I actually use personal pronouns occasionally when explaining technical issues in computer systems. Something like "I'm the mail server and you are the mail client. First you connect to my port 25, then .." is the pattern. (It's actually less suggestive than it sounds. 8)

    I'm ignorant about German, but I know Romance languages have gender for nouns and adjectives. Thus it isn't surprising to me hear a French, Spanish or Portuguese native speaker use pronouns like "he" or "she" in English conversation when referring to objects other than human beings. Is German the same in that respect?

    Regards,
    Howard


    Quote:
    it isn't surprising to me hear a French, Spanish or Portuguese native speaker use pronouns like "he" or "she" in English conversation when referring to objects other than human beings. Is German the same in that respect?

    German features 50% extra: it has 3 genders for nouns like Latin or Greek. So there is male, female and neutral. It's pretty hard for foreigners to learn which noun carries which gender. E.g. locomotive is female, lake is male, and girl is neutral d:-)

    Quote:
    German features 50% extra: it has 3 genders for nouns like Latin or Greek. So there is male, female and neutral. It's pretty hard for foreigners to learn which noun carries which gender. E.g. locomotive is female, lake is male, and girl is neutral d:-)

    English was that way once, like the other Germanic languages. For instance, stan (stone) was masculine, sunne (sun) was feminine, and scip (ship) was neuter. But we've lost most of that, except for personal pronouns like he, she, and it.

    English can be rather strange with regards to the "genders" too.

    "Gender" in language, at least originally, referred to which
    "kind" a word was, not necessarily to which sexual characteristics
    were associated with it, which may perhaps explain some seeming
    oddities in linguistic genders.

    But of course, which sexual characteristics (masculine or
    feminine) something seems to have, or the lack of sexual
    characteristics (neuter), seems a natural way of classifying into
    which "kind" it is too, and the modern usage of "gender" is
    usually understood to mean which "sex" something is.

    English started out as a west Germanic dialect, so modern English
    does share a lot with modern German and the other modern
    "Germanic" languages, but English has been extensively modified
    (and, in some ways, simplified) by the use of Latin by the church
    and the learned, intermingling with the "Danes" (Vikings) and the
    Norman French, and many of its speakers being familiar with and
    rather freely borrowing from other languages. Remember that
    English was once a rather obscure language usually used only in a
    part of the island of Great Britain.

    Of course, sometimes a language is modified just for the fun of it, or to identify the speakers with a particular group.

    In modern English, for the personal pronouns and adjectives, only
    the third person singulars "he", "him", "his", "she", "her",
    "hers", "it", and "its" have any gender. Plural and first and
    second person pronouns and adjectives are "genderless".

    For the most part, a "person" is either masculine or feminine, and
    a "non-person" is neuter.

    The feminines are always used for a definitely female person, but
    the "masculines" are used both for a definitely male person and
    for a "person of unknown gender".

    Some seem to find using the masculine for a person of unknown
    gender rather uncomfortable or downright objectionable, as if the
    "masculine" should be used only for a male, and not for either a
    male or a female, whichever the person happens to be.

    Sometimes, to avoid using a masculine for a person of unknown
    gender, a plural is resorted to. For example, the plural "they" is
    sometimes used with the singular "everyone", and the plural
    "their" is sometimes used with the singular "anyone". This seems
    to be pretty much accepted English usage, but the disagreement in
    number rather jars on my ears.

    Similarly, constructions such as "he or she" or even "he/she" are
    sometimes resorted to, but they seem clumsy and just don't "sound
    right" to me.

    Those who object to English using the "masculine" for a person of
    unknown gender sometimes seem to make it a point to use the
    feminine for such cases, but that sounds very stilted and
    unnatural. "Making a point" about one of the oddities of standard
    English language rather distracts me from whatever other
    communication is being attempted.

    A human is almost always treated as either masculine or feminine,
    but an infant is sometimes treated as neuter, as though not really
    a "person" yet.

    Sometimes it's ambiguous which sex a person is, and in such cases,
    it's rather debatable which gender to use.

    An animal may be treated as masculine or feminine (a "person"),
    even if it has been physiologically "neutered", but may be treated
    as neuter (a "non-person").

    Inanimate nouns are usually neuter, but sometimes an inanimate
    noun is "personified", in which case it's treated as either
    masculine or feminine, depending on tradition or on which
    characteristics seem most important. For example, the sun is
    neuter, but the Sun is male; the earth is neuter, but of course
    Mother Earth is feminine. A ship is feminine (even if it has a
    "masculine" name) or occasionally neuter, and automobiles and other
    machines (things that males "fall in love with", I suppose) are
    often feminine. An oak may be treated as masculine due to it
    sturdiness (even though its acorns may seem a feminine
    characteristic), and a willow may be treated as feminine due to
    its suppleness.

    I'm often impressed by how clearly those in this forum who (I
    guess) don't have English as their mother tongues communicate in
    English, sometimes better than those of us who (I guess) do have
    English as our native language. Maybe those who use English as a
    second language tend to be particularly careful in how they use
    it.

    Regards,
    James

    Edited: 6 June 2007, 2:16 a.m.


    Thanks for the long explanation.

    Quote:
    For example, the sun is neuter, but the Sun is male;

    Another interesting observation: in Romance languages, the sun is male and the moon is female, in Germanic languages (if not simplified) the sun is female and the moon is male. May depend on whether you long for the sun in the north or you long for the shade in the south?

    Quote:
    (things that males "fall in love with", I suppose)

    Don't you mean "things with which males fall in love"?

    Ending a phrase with a preposition is so common place that it is not even considered bad English anymore--you see it here even in the esteemed Globe & Mail, the Toronto-based newspaper that is about the closest we get here in terms of erudition and prestige to the New York Times or Washington Post. But it still drives me bananas.

    And also don't you mean "things with which men fall in love?" Male and female are, I thought, properly used as adjectives. Particularly fussy and inflexible grammarians of a former age may snarkily inquire "but what do you mean? a male sheep? a male cat? a male frog?"

    This all said, I am reminded that present day linguists would remind us that language is organic and changes continually (notice I said continually and not continuously) and would advise that notions of "properness" and "correctness" are all relative to social and historical norms and expectations of the day and as such are scarcely absolute.

    So, with apologies to GBS, there are some annoying things in spoken and written English today up with which I just have to put!

    Les


    Irregardless of our sensibilities, language won't stand still. The word I began that sentence with is a good example. It actually means "regardless," so the negating prefix "ir-" is nonsensical when combined with the negating suffix "-less." But I remember that the then President of the United States, a Nuclear Engineer by the name of Jimmy Carter, used the word in a televised press conference, which generated howls of outrage from my English professor father. The word now appears in most dictionaries of American English, although it's an even bet whether it will make it into the O.E.D. this century.

    English is a particularly supple language. I think that is partly America's fault. We tend to be contemptuous, ignorant or at least unmindful of most traditions, linguistic or otherwise. But we Americans didn't originate the tendency to borrow from other languages. The Romans, Vikings and Norman French all brought distinct influences to bear on the then parochial English language. Another factor contributing to the current rate of change in English is its widespread use around the world. The British Empire spread English all over the globe in the 18th and 19th Centuriies, and the American ascendancy in cultural, economic , military and political terms in the last half of the 20th Century greatly expanded on that base. The Internet, invented in the US, and mostly text based even today, contains many English pages. (I don't know if Chinese has caught up yet. I read somewhere that it is predicted to do so.) All of these non-native English speakers contribute their idioms and vocabulary too.

    So IMHO, I think y'all should jes' sit back and enjoy the diversity. It ain't a big deal if'n a body caint speak like a banker or a lawyer. LOL!

    Regards,
    Howard


    Does still the verb "to bobbit" exist, after some Lorena Bobbit did what she did long time ago?

    An Italian tv news journal, then, affirmed how fast was English to create new words, but I wonder

    a) if they are widely accepted and

    b) if they last enough to be put into a dictionary.

    -- Antonio

    Quote:


    Don't you mean "things with which males fall in love"?

    Ending a phrase with a preposition is so common place that it is not even considered bad English anymore--you see it here even in the esteemed Globe & Mail, the Toronto-based newspaper that is about the closest we get here in terms of erudition and prestige to the New York Times or Washington Post. But it still drives me bananas.


    [JOKE]

    Hank, a Texan, is spending his first day at Harvard as a Freshman.
    He asks someone he encounters, "Say, could you tell me where the Library is at?"

    The other person haughtily replies, "This is Cambridge, we do not end our
    sentences with a preposition."

    Hank then says, "I'm sorry, that is the way we talk back in Texas.
    Please allow me to rephrase the question."

    "Say, could you tell me where the Library is at, asshole?"

    [/JOKE]

    (Ducking, running and grinning!)

    Hi, Howard;

    Quote:
    Thus it isn't surprising to me hear a French, Spanish or Portuguese native speaker use pronouns like "he" or "she" in English conversation when referring to objects other than human beings.

    There are neither neutral articles nor pronoums in Portuguese, we have 'ele' for 'he', 'ela' for 'she', and 'eles' or 'elas' for 'they'. Articles, by their own, are 'o' for 'male' objects and 'a' or 'female', both replacing 'the'. Like:

    'o' livro (the book) or 'a' cadeira (the chair).

    The problem is that there is no way to 'signify' an object as male or female, and in some cases, their gender 'shift' from one language to another. I know German has the three possibilities: an object may be neutral, female or male. AFAIK, english officially defines one female object: ship. They are all 'she'. Is that correct?

    Also, there is no direct replacement for 'it', completely new for us, Portuguese speakers. If someone sees a dog and wants to ask if it belongs to someone, it would be:

    'Ele é seu?' (Is HE yours?)

    There is no portuguese word for 'it'. We have some instances that allow us to believe that we had the chance to have some neutral references, because in Portuguese we have 'esse', 'essa' and 'isso', being them the equivalent to 'this' as for male, female and neutral. (same for 'aquele', 'aquela' and 'aquilo', equivalent to 'that' the same way)

    Again, this forum rules!

    Cheers.

    Luiz (Brazil)


    Edited: 5 June 2007, 8:06 p.m. after one or more responses were posted


    'Tis true: a ship is feminine--is "she."

    And yet, just to keep the consternation factor high, it is of course perfectly acceptable to name a ship after a man, E.G. the "Harvey Gamage."

    Quote:
    AFAIK, english officially defines one female object: ship. They are all 'she'. Is that correct?

    That's just a matter of customary usage, not language structure. English lacks gender qualified articles, so "the ship" is the neutral translation of the gender qualified Spanish "el barco." Wikipedia's article on grammatical gender contains
    a section on English. It points out that English retains a few gender qualified nouns. The suffix "-ess" is used for some nouns to indicate the "natural" gender of the object. So we have "actor" and "actress," for example. But the referenced article states that ".. these are insignificant features compared to a typical language with grammatical gender." Usage of the "-ess" ending is on the decline in American English, at least, primarily due to the influence of Feminism. (And, no doubt, to the well established trend in English to wring out redundancy in the language.)

    Regarding the use of the gender qualified pronoun "she" used in speaking of a ship, the Wikepedia article says this: "The pronoun "she" is sometimes used to refer to countries, ships or machines, and in poetic personalizations, though this is considered a stylistically marked, optional figure of speech. This usage is furthermore in decline and advised against by most journalistic style guides such as the Chicago Manual of Style." (Emphasis added.) So the complaint about referring to a calculator as "he" has even less basis than I thought. 8)

    Regards,
    Howard

    Hi,

    always keen to learn something new. But maybe not that public if you know what I mean. BTW I think anyone else would get bored if a quarter of all messages would try to spread correct english across the globe.

    I am a foreigner living outside the US/UK. So by definition I am allowed to write english in a funny style 8)

    More over I live in Sweden talking swedish all the time. So not enough with bad english, I even have a hard time with keeping my native german alive!

    Med vänlig hälsning / Mit freundlichem Gruß / best regards

    Frank


    You are welcome here, without any requirements that you write perfectly in any language, Frank. I understood you completely.

    Regards,
    Howard


    Hello Howard,

    thanks for the warm welcome! I actually started to post here only some days ago. But I have been following this excellent forum for more than a year and found it always to be a first class information source when it comes to HP calculators.

    If you ask me this language issue is past now and I am looking forward to enjoy the further calculator discussion.

    Frank


    Well, you are welcome here but as you have probably surmised upon further reflection, the language thing is hardly past--we seem to relish the language thing around here--almost as much as maths (perhaps even more sometimes).

    P.S. is the Blossipor and Tussilago past yet?


    Moi Bill,

    yes. The typical spring flowers are almost gone. And after a week with much rain the summer has arrived. Hopefully we will have such a fine weather around midsummereve when the swedes enjoy their "sill" (pickled herring) and "nubbar" (schnapps). Not to forget the famous dance around the midsummerpole when everybody sings "little frogs is what we are, no ears, no ears, no tails we have" A strange sight for non-swedes.

    BTW, your name does not sound very finnish. Do you use a pseudonym when posting?

    Näkemisiin!


    Frank and all, I was not criticizing your English at all (not natively "spoken" here either), just stressing the fact that you may be putting a little too much affection in your relationship with something which is essentially just plastic and other components (cleverly) put together.

    I know I have the exact same problem but *try* to hide this by never using 'he' or 'she'...

    And welcome aboard !

    Quote:
    --almost as much as maths

    Did you say "maths"? Is that how they say it in the North-East, or are you spelling it that way out of courtesy to our European neighbors? I'm assuming the latter, because pronouncing that t-h-s sound just doesn't roll off the tongue easily for most americans.. kind of sounds like somebody letting the air out a tire (or tyre :-).

    I think I just confirmed your statement that "we seem to relish the language thing around here".

    Matt

    p.s. I realize "maths" an abbreviation of "mathematics".. I'm just messing with you <8^)


    :-D

    BTW, is it "Matt" or "Matts"?

    ;->


    Well it's a good thing my first name isn't "Meta".. that would be just too wierd (unless I was the author of it, I guess).

    Matt

    p.s. I get a kick out of Les Wright's name, this being a calculator forum and all :D

    p.p.s. Paul, it would sure be nice if you and and your wife could make it to San Diego this September for the HHC2007 conference. I flew down to San Jose for $103 RT from Portland for last year's get together. I mention this because my wife just gave me the go-ahead to go again since I told her it was a big year (and possibly because she got a neat 12C anniversary edition when I got home last year - she fell in love with the case actually and had to learn to use RPN as requirement to keep it (- mwahhaha - evil laugh - that).


    It's in my Outlook, and I've already broached the subject. I'm counting upon being there, but who really knows? (I'm signed up to pull my boat out of the water that Monday for its winter refit, so I'll be busy . . . )

    My wife may come along, but not because of any calculator! I don't think she finds any piece of technology less compelling than she does "office equipment". (And RPN? Forget it!)

    For us, the MoHPC & etc. don't fall under the category of "shared interests".

    I know of a realtor named Sue Moore. She should have been a lawyer. But yeah, for this site, Les Wright is a good name.

    Edited: 7 June 2007, 3:18 p.m.

    Terve!

    Sweden isn't so far from Finland.


    (

    Are you this Bill Platt?

    )

    -- Antonio

    Edited: 6 June 2007, 11:58 a.m.


    Nope.

    If he was, do you think he'd admit to being a phantom writer?

    :^P

    Ren

    dona nobis pacem

    Quote:

    Are you this Bill Platt?

    -- Antonio


    Quote:
    Finally hp 35s!

    http://www.calculators-hp.com/pdf/35s.pdf


    Sorry, I can't see it. Every site I visit quotes the HP 33s, not the 35s, the above link is broken, the only thing that seemed to work was the declaration of conformity. http://h40047.www4.hp.com/certificates/media.php/doc/computers/handhelds_and_calculators/CE_35s_Scientific_Calculator_HSTNJ-KN01.pdf

    Are you guys high on something ? Where can I see an announcement and a picture. Sorry if I seem dense, but I do want some more confirmation than a thread on a forum.


    Looks like they took down that site also.

    If anyone at HP is reading this forum, how about some feedback regarding this product. There is too much speculation, and some official word would be appreciated.


    Why would HP do anything of the sort if, as appears likely, it was an unofficial leak that they are not happy with?

    I presume HP won't give any information out until they are ready, regardless of what a distributor seems to have done.

    An HTML version of the pdf in Google cache, no pictures though:

    http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:yZTzMESrqeQJ:www.calculators-hp.com/pdf/35s.pdf+www.calculators-hp.com/pdf/35s.pdf&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2


    Note the HP35s flyer says:

    "Choose between RPN or algebraic entry-system logic—no other scientific calculator offers both"

    As the HP33s has RPN and algebraic data entry, this seems to imply the HP33s will disappear from store shelves once the HP35s is available.

    regards,

    koen


    That will not cause me headaches d:-)

    Cyrille's photos are still up.

    Search back in this thread for "hpmad" to find the other link.


    Hmm. Looking at this photo in full resolution for the first time, it seems to confirm what I thought I saw before. That calc has a broken LCD. It would seem that "hpmad" isn't quite that crazy after all 8)

    Regards,
    Howard

    Edited: 1 June 2007, 11:20 p.m.


    Actually, the LCD is fine; it's not broken. What you're seeing in there is the reflection of the giraffe's foot. Orange leg, black hoof on a yellow background. I've seen that baby blanket print before. ;-)

    thanks,
    bruce


    That's plausible.

    So I think we should view this picture as part of a field stress test, which to judge by the subject's expression, seems to have gone very well! That old HP quality is back for sure!

    8)

    Regards,
    Howard


    Possibly Related Threads...
    Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
      WP34S ver 3,2 Arrived from Eric Namir 0 55 04-16-2013, 03:30 PM
    Last Post: Namir
      DM 15CC silver edition arrived! Hans Holzach 10 245 12-05-2012, 01:40 AM
    Last Post: Juergen Keller
      DM-15cc arrived Ethan Conner 25 469 08-18-2012, 02:55 AM
    Last Post: aurelio
      The Blue HP 50g has arrived. Eddie W. Shore 48 891 08-05-2012, 02:55 PM
    Last Post: Eddie W. Shore
      DM calcs arrived, but... David Ramsey 4 123 08-04-2012, 12:42 PM
    Last Post: Michael de Estrada
      DM-16cc arrived Lincoln R. 0 57 07-12-2012, 12:04 AM
    Last Post: Lincoln R.
      HP 71B arrived Harald 17 302 05-22-2012, 02:39 AM
    Last Post: Bruce Larrabee
      SY-41CL v.3 YFNZ-3B Arrived! Amazing! Kerem Kapkin (Silicon Valley, CA) 4 121 05-19-2012, 11:09 AM
    Last Post: Monte Dalrymple
      HP Solve Newsletter April 2012 arrived Karl-Ludwig Butte 10 220 05-03-2012, 08:08 AM
    Last Post: Matt Agajanian
      WP 34S USB flash adaptor arrived Harald 53 976 04-29-2012, 11:03 PM
    Last Post: Dale Reed

    Forum Jump: