HHC2007 Poll Result: Bring Back the HP42S



#72

There was a questionnaire at the HHC2007. Once of the questions was:

If HP were to re-release a legacy calculator which model would be most appealing to you?
A. HP-15C B. HP-42S C. HP-16C D. HP-71B

The poll was:

HP-15C: 11.6%

HP-42s: 51.2%

HP-16C: 18.6%

HP-71B: 18.6%

Soooo .... HP .... PLEASE BRING BACK THE HP-42S!!!

:-)

Namir

Edited: 10 Oct 2007, 11:20 p.m.


#73

Even if they just built a platform that ONLY ran Free42, and then made it work with physical keys and an LCD, *THAT* would be cool! :-)

thanks,
bruce

#74

I've never used the 42s, so I can't comment on menus, keyboard layout, ease of use, etc. However, in terms of build quality, does it equal that of the legendary 15C?

I would tentatively vote for a new 42 series if it has the same or better build quality as the 15C and if data entry for matrix operations are more intuitive or easy. Otherwise, I want a new 15C series machine!

Cheers!

David Bailey

Edited: 11 Oct 2007, 1:48 a.m.

#75

Even a re-release "as was" would give it a better LCD, because you cannot get such a foggy thing anymore for production nowadays. So the most serious flaw of the 42s would be overcome "automatically"... :)

A bit more realistic (and even better): Since we know for sure the (expensive) molds for the 35s are available, I'd guess anything based on this form factor would have higher probability. Slanted keys! And a full set of cursors e.g. for matrix editing! Besides software and some printing on keys and plate (and some other stuff I've forgotten), one shall need a better LCD as well. May be borrowed from a graph calc?

Such speculations are always fun, regardless of their low chances for realisation...


#76

Hi,

the proposed silverbird 17bII+ already has the correct keyboard layout,

number of keys, and dot matrix LCD.

So an updated 42S would base on that machine, not the 35s;-)

Raymond

#77

Quote:
A bit more realistic (and even better): Since we know for sure the (expensive) molds for the 35s are available, I'd guess anything based on this form factor would have higher probability. Slanted keys! And a full set of cursors e.g. for matrix editing! Besides software and some printing on keys and plate (and some other stuff I've forgotten), one shall need a better LCD as well. May be borrowed from a graph calc?

I agree that the 42s would be the most desirable model to reindroduce. Actually, I really like all the Pioneer series, and wish HP had never stopped making them... they were truly pocketable... but HP did not consult me. However, I agree that such a calculator would most likely appear in the 35s form factor.


#78

Quote:


I agree that the 42s would be the most desirable model to reindroduce. Actually, I really like all the Pioneer series, and wish HP had never stopped making them... they were truly pocketable... but HP did not consult me. However, I agree that such a calculator would most likely appear in the 35s form factor.


Don't be so sure.

I'm sure HP didn't create the new 17BII+ look without some other future in mind. And it has everything needed for a new 42S, just needs new keytops and new software. It's essentially just a software project then.

Same thing for the 15C.

So modern hardware bases exist for both machines.

Dave.


#79

Quote:
it has everything needed for a new 42S, just needs new keytops and new software. It's essentially just a software project then.

Same thing for the 15C.


The basic decision is whether you want a resurrection or a reincarantion. For sure there are hardware platforms to let the 15C and 42S rise from death. But only "as was", i.e. skipping 25 or 20 years of progress in user interfacing. The most visible progress was in the areas of memory modules, communication and displays.

So, does the market want living dead rather than some development?

One major difference between Gene's and Jake's design of a 45s based on 42S, my proposal of a 45s based on 35s hardware, my proposals of a 15Cx and a 15Cg -- and the vintage models are the displays. IMHO a pocket calc with the old rusty LCDs will not be regarded as cool anymore. And there shall be a way to exchange data (for backup and editing on PCs) -- otherwise it won't be a useful tool, but a mere toy.

Just my 20 milli Euro.


#80

Quote:


The basic decision is whether you want a resurrection or a reincarantion. For sure there are hardware platforms to let the 15C and 42S rise from death. But only "as was", i.e. skipping 25 or 20 years of progress in user interfacing. The most visible progress was in the areas of memory modules, communication and displays.

So, does the market want living dead rather than some development?

One major difference between Gene's and Jake's design of a 45s based on 42S, my proposal of a 45s based on 35s hardware, my proposals of a 15Cx and a 15Cg -- and the vintage models are the displays. IMHO a pocket calc with the old rusty LCDs will not be regarded as cool anymore. And there shall be a way to exchange data (for backup and editing on PCs) -- otherwise it won't be a useful tool, but a mere toy.


For a high end programmable calc, sure I/O and the other stuff are needed.
However, what's wrong with a good basic non-programmable scientific calculator? That's all I and most people I know need on a daily basis. Modern one's like the Casio FX-991ES show what's possible as far as feature set go. Couple that with the HP look and feel and that's something I'd certainly want to buy.
The bonus is software development is a lot easier and quicker than for a full-blown programmable calc.

Dave.


#81

I think there is room for both;

- A good, basic non-programmable scientific for [$] to compete with low ends (Casio, TI, et al).

- An EXCELLENT, PROGRAMMABLE scientific for [$$$$] for people who want quality and state-of-the-art design.

A few years ago I had outgrown my Palm IIIC, and spent $800 on a Sony UX-50. Yes, eight hundred bucks for a PDA. The thing had wifi, bluetooth, camera, voice recorder, flip-screen, BACKLIT keyboard, memory card support, *everything*, and it fit in the palm of the hand. It was the coolest gadget ever. And productive too..

UX-50 review

In 1973, people were paying $400 for an hp 35. That's about $1900 today. My UX-50 was cheap compared to that, and it's practically a supercomputer compared to an hp 35.

I think HP should go for it. Produce a high end, programmable scientific, with i/o, that is smaller than an hp 50g, and I'll bet many people will buy it. If it has enough mathematical grunt, professors and researchers might be able to expense one for their work and buy one out of their own pocket for home use (hobby time).


;) Pal


#82

Quote:
- An EXCELLENT, PROGRAMMABLE scientific for [$$$$] for people who want quality and state-of-the-art design.
I think HP should go for it. Produce a high end, programmable scientific, with i/o, that is smaller than an hp 50g, and I'll bet many people will buy it. If it has enough mathematical grunt, professors and researchers might be able to expense one for their work and buy one out of their own pocket for home use (hobby time).

HP already have a top of the range programmable calc in the 50G. I don't think they will want to re-invent the wheel on that one, software and interface wise. But a new package could be in order, just like Casio repackaged the FX-9860G as the folding "slim" model. Now that was interesting...

Dave.


#83

Dave, my friend, I mentioned my idea for an excellent programmable should be "smaller than an hp 50g". Perhaps I should have stressed _much_ smaller than an hp 50g.

I have an hp 50g too, and I love everything it can do, but it is TOO BIG. Gene and Richard's 45s prototype is about perfect (pocket) size.

Having an hp 50g at work makes you a huge target for GEEK/NERD comments. Having an hp 45s on the desktop would be the ultimate killer, sleeper calc.

To be honest, that is why I purchased (expensed!) an hp 35s. Sits on the desk at work instead of my hp 50g, which I used to have at work, but I leave at home so I don't get called names. Hahahahahaha..


;) Pal


#84

Nothing wrong being called a nerd, special if you are one... :-)


#85

Quote:
Nothing wrong being called a nerd, special if you are one... :-)

LOL. When I was an undergrad EE major, being called a gEEk was a positive thing, a privilege actually. It meant you were above average in math and science. I really didn't mind because my friends and I were always cracking jokes to each other. Times have changed. Being called a geek or nerd is now a negative thing, and many people in the USA are not interested in math and science.

David Bailey

#86

Quote:
Dave, my friend, I mentioned my idea for an excellent programmable should be "smaller than an hp 50g". Perhaps I should have stressed _much_ smaller than an hp 50g.

I have an hp 50g too, and I love everything it can do, but it is TOO BIG. Gene and Richard's 45s prototype is about perfect (pocket) size.

Having an hp 50g at work makes you a huge target for GEEK/NERD comments. Having an hp 45s on the desktop would be the ultimate killer, sleeper calc.

To be honest, that is why I purchased (expensed!) an hp 35s. Sits on the desk at work instead of my hp 50g, which I used to have at work, but I leave at home so I don't get called names. Hahahahahaha..

;) Pal


You should try walking around work wearing this!
and see how many nerd/geek remarks you get!

On the surface it seems like it would not be much work hardware or software wise to repackage the 50G into a 45S style. And that's what I'm talking about, don't waste development efort developing a whole new top-line calc, just repackage some current ones.

Dave.


#87

Quote:
You should try walking around work wearing this! and see how many nerd/geek remarks you get!

Temperature sensor?!? How cool is that! (Pun not intended). I have several Casios watches with that..

Will it support 24HR clock and Fahrenheit? Or is it REALLY cold where you are?

(Or is it really hot in the studio where you are taking those pics (86.36 deg)).

:) Pal


#88

Quote:


Temperature sensor?!? How cool is that! (Pun not intended). I have several Casios watches with that..

Will it support 24HR clock and Fahrenheit? Or is it REALLY cold where you are?

(Or is it really hot in the studio where you are taking those pics (86.36 deg)).


Yes it has selectable 12/24 hour mode.
Doesn't currently support degF, but I guess I could add that for you rather strange US folk! :-P

For the date would you like 13-10-07, 10-13-07, 13.10.07, 10.13.07, 13/10/07, 10/13/07, 13th Oct 07, or Oct 13th 07? :->

Dave.


#89

For date: 2007-10-13

Regards,
James


#90

Quote:
For date: 2007-10-13

Hear, hear! It's the ISO standard. :)

#91

What if HP could make the 50G into a compact size, similar to a Casio 9960g Slim - of course with a SD slot. I think it can be done and you will not need more keys than the current 50G has.

Add: backlight (nice job, Casio), SD card, voice recorder (to record voice messages), calendar.


#92

Quote:
What if HP could make the 50G into a compact size, similar to a Casio 9960g Slim - of course with a SD slot. I think it can be done and you will not need more keys than the current 50G has.

Add: backlight (nice job, Casio), SD card, voice recorder (to record voice messages), calendar.


It can certainly be done, it's just a matter of HP making the commitment to doing it.

I wouldn't buy one, as I have no need for a calc in that market segment, but I'd imagine there are plenty who would love such a powerful machine in a much smaller form factor.

I really like the proposed 45S Pioneer size model.

I'd leave out the voice recording and calendar functionality, that crosses over into the realm of todays mobile phones. Te KISS principle is a good thing.

Dave.

#93

Pal, while I totally agree about wanting HP to "go for it" and I would be the first in line to buy one, I think people keep forgetting a critical law of economics here:

Value is perceived.

People have tried to translate $400 1973 dollars into 2007 dollars and they get a $2000 (or something) figure. Which they then use to say "back when, I actually paid $2000 for a calculator (in today's money)..." as if to illustrate how things today would go. The flaw in that is that back in 1973 and even 1983 and 1993, computers were still huge machines with extremely high dollar amounts. Spending $400 for a calc back then was *perceived* as being a big chunk of your pocket cash, but it was also *perceived* to be a good deal. No one today would spend $400 for a calculator (even me!! ;) because technology is so ubiquitous. As you pointed out, we have PDA's that do *everything* imaginable. Heck, my GPS unit in my car has a calculator, an address book, bluetooth functionality, it speaks street names, plays music and video, and can even download traffic updates from the internet. Oh yeah, it also is a mapping GPS. ;-) And I paid something like $250 for it.

So, while I would love to see HP come up with some high-end calcs, the demand just isn't there. There would only be a few of us calc nuts out there buying, and HP can't justify that. It can, however, justify mass-producing a mid-market unit that address a lot (if not most) of the needs of the folks out there.

I think HP once said that they'd need to sell at LEAST 25,000 of any one unit to *break even* on the costs, and that's assuming a fairly normal unit with no special features. I think we'd have a hard time selling 25,000 high-end units. Yeah, I'd buy two, but still...

Again, I'm not knocking your idea as a bad one -- just not an economically feasible one. ;-)

thanks,
bruce


#94

Quote:
Pal, while I totally agree about wanting HP to "go for it" and I would be the first in line to buy one, I think people keep forgetting a critical law of economics here:

Value is perceived.

People have tried to translate $400 1973 dollars into 2007 dollars and they get a $2000 (or something) figure. Which they then use to say "back when, I actually paid $2000 for a calculator (in today's money)..." as if to illustrate how things today would go. The flaw in that is that back in 1973 and even 1983 and 1993, computers were still huge machines with extremely high dollar amounts. Spending $400 for a calc back then was *perceived* as being a big chunk of your pocket cash, but it was also *perceived* to be a good deal. No one today would spend $400 for a calculator (even me!! ;) because technology is so ubiquitous. As you pointed out, we have PDA's that do *everything* imaginable. Heck, my GPS unit in my car has a calculator, an address book, bluetooth functionality, it speaks street names, plays music and video, and can even download traffic updates from the internet. Oh yeah, it also is a mapping GPS. ;-) And I paid something like $250 for it.

So, while I would love to see HP come up with some high-end calcs, the demand just isn't there. There would only be a few of us calc nuts out there buying, and HP can't justify that. It can, however, justify mass-producing a mid-market unit that address a lot (if not most) of the needs of the folks out there.

I think HP once said that they'd need to sell at LEAST 25,000 of any one unit to *break even* on the costs, and that's assuming a fairly normal unit with no special features. I think we'd have a hard time selling 25,000 high-end units. Yeah, I'd buy two, but still...

Again, I'm not knocking your idea as a bad one -- just not an economically feasible one. ;-)

thanks,
bruce


I, too, also feel that way concerning today's market demand for high-end calculators. There appears to be good demand for graphing calculators. Why are TI calculators so much more ubiquitous than are HP calculators among students? What is TI doing right that allows them to maintain their market share? Listen, folks. If HP is to remain a competitive source of the calculator technology, they need to aggressively target the academic audience. Engineering and science students who use a particular calculator brand will most likely use the same brand in their professional careers. Agree? Although I can only assume on this forum, it appears that many HP die-hards here are working professionals?

In the near future (maybe < 12 years from now), will calculators even exist as dedicated hardware? Will we have fast, affordable, 64 GB capacity, Wi-Fi ready, fuel-cell powered, hand-held devices that can function as a calculator of your choice (via downloadable calculator software from HP, TI, Casio, Sharp, etc.) and as a portable computer? Such a device could have a touch-sensitive, OLED keyboard layout that can adjust to the specific calculator model of your choice.

Cheers!

David Bailey


Edited: 15 Oct 2007, 2:03 a.m. after one or more responses were posted


#95

Quote:
Why are TI calculators so much more ubiquitous than are HP calculators among students? What is TI doing right that allows them to maintain their market share?

TI went after the teacher and the textbook writer. My kid's textbook is written for the TI83+ (which I think is wrong, I'm still old school and believe the books should only be written for pen and ink). Students don't care, a calculator is a tool to get homework done and take tests with. My kid has so much more to worry about (sports, a social life, work, etc...). Learning to use a different device to get the same results is unimaginable. Teachers have always selected your textbook and now they select your calculator. Some schools even pick out your clothes.

Quote:
In the near future (< 12 years from now), will calculators even exist as dedicated hardware?

Yes, until something with better capability/cost is introduced.

What happens when testing centers go computer? You walk in, you sit at a terminal, it has the test and the tools you need. Nothing else is permitted in the testing center. No more calculators required for testing.

My kid's school when laptop this year. Every student must have a MacBook. Calculator alternatives provide better visualization. Kids in high school today that become teachers in the future may expect a computer in the classroom.

Portable, low power, high function, low cost calculators become less important as computers become more ubiquitous. Very few need the sin of a number away from their desks. The calculator on my kid's iPhone is more than enough for mobile basic math. Lets face it, when on the move, away from your desk, basic math is all the masses really need.

I firmly believe that the hand held calculator will be replaced with something else within a generation or two. Even though slide rules are still manufactured today (at least on watch bezels), my 16 year old would have no idea what you were talking about. Her kids will be equally confused about the hand held calculator.


#96

Quote:

Yes, until something with better capability/cost is introduced.

What happens when testing centers go computer? You walk in, you sit at a terminal, it has the test and the tools you need. Nothing else is permitted in the testing center. No more calculators required for testing.

My kid's school when laptop this year. Every student must have a MacBook. Calculator alternatives provide better visualization. Kids in high school today that become teachers in the future may expect a computer in the classroom.

Portable, low power, high function, low cost calculators become less important as computers become more ubiquitous. Very few need the sin of a number away from their desks. The calculator on my kid's iPhone is more than enough for mobile basic math. Lets face it, when on the move, away from your desk, basic math is all the masses really need.

I firmly believe that the hand held calculator will be replaced with something else within a generation or two. Even though slide rules are still manufactured today (at least on watch bezels), my 16 year old would have no idea what you were talking about. Her kids will be equally confused about the hand held calculator.


Egan,

Yes, that is what I was generally trying to say. You said it much more accurately. You are correct concerning TI. They indeed have influenced many authors and publishers of math textbooks up to the undergrad university level. I edited my other posting before I realized your response. The writing may already be on the wall, and HP probably knows this. Convergence of multiple technologies onto one device is not always an easy thing to accomplish in terms of design and usability, as Dr. Donald Norman points out (concerning the paradox of technology) in his book, The Design of Everyday Things:

"Technology offers the potential to make life easier and more enjoyable; each new technology provides increased benefits. At the same time, added complexities arise to increase our difficulty and frustration...As technicians become more competent and an industry matures, devices become simpler, more reliable, and more powerful. But then, after the industry has stabilized, newcomers figure out how to add increased power and capability, but always at the expense of added complexity and sometimes decreased reliability...Added complexity and difficulty cannot be avoided when functions are added, but with clever design, they can be minimized." (pages 29-30, 33).

David Bailey

Edited: 13 Oct 2007, 2:44 p.m.

#97

#98

Quote:

Soooo .... HP .... PLEASE BRING BACK THE HP-42S!!!

:-)


... but don't forget the I/O and/or connection to PC

;)


#99

Or at least use FLASH/EEPROM memory for program storage.

Dave.


And SD connection!

A for some more wishful thinking: program capability between 42S and 50g (it will take a software update).

And a SD card port!

Also the ability to run 42s programs on the 50g.

Well, I've never owned or used a HP-42S, but basing on what is exposed on the MoHPC pages and on the faith and enthusiasm that characterize HP-42S users,


add me to the list!

-- Antonio

Hello!

Quote:
Soooo .... HP .... PLEASE BRING BACK THE HP-42S!!!

Unfortunately, I was not able to attend this conference (hopefully, the next one will be held at HP's German headquarters so that I can go there by bicycle :-) ) and therefore couldn't take part in this poll, but I would have ticked the box: "Don't bring back any of these calculators".

They are fine examples of the technology of their time and of substantial value to collectors and addicts, maybe even useful to do actual work for a handful of people (worldwide! most of them are gathered on this website anyway...).

But now we live in the year 2007 and technology, ergonomics, taste, style, and most important of all, the role of the pocket calculator itself have changed considerably. The new 35s is an important first step to bridge the gap between then and now, but _now_ is still far away from the the 35s and even further from the models listed in this poll.

I don't want to start a new discussion about what a 2007 calculator model should look like, but for me certainly it does not even remotely resemle the good old 42S!

Greetings, Max


Quote:
But now we live in the year 2007 and technology, ergonomics, taste, style, and most important of all, the role of the pocket calculator itself have changed considerably. The new 35s is an important first step to bridge the gap between then and now, but _now_ is still far away from the the 35s and even further from the models listed in this poll.

An interesting question.
So what would others want to see in a *modern* design pocket calculator?

I for one want to see a *real* pocket calculator, one I can actually fit in my pocket, not Bill Hewlett's insanely big pocket.

I want a calc that has a nice rich high contrast 7 segment display. Dot matrix can never be as good, and it's not needed on a basic calc. No screen glare please.

Dual line display would be nice.

I want lots of useful dedicated keys with good engineering and base conversion functionality. Ditch the programming keys please.

Keystroke programming is cool, you can remember how to use it after 6 months, so add that.

I want a battery life of at least a couple of years, and preferably dual solar battery power.

I want a *thin* calculator.

I want something with lots of rubber area on the bottom so it doesn't slide around on any surface.

I want labels I can read.

What do others want?

Dave.


Quote:
What do others want?
A 35SII. Bugs out, P<>R conversions in. That's all I'm asking for. Maybe a better display, too :^).

Quote:

A 35SII. Bugs out, P<>R conversions in. That's all I'm asking for. Maybe a better display, too :^).


Come on, this is the brass ring, shoot for something more than that! :->

Dave.

Hello!

Quote:
I for one want to see a *real* pocket calculator, one I can actually fit in my pocket, not Bill Hewlett's insanely big pocket.

Definitely! My favourite calculators are all very small, like the HP-25 or the Aristo M27 or the cutest of all: the CalcuPen.

Quote:
I want a calc that has a nice rich high contrast 7 segment display. Dot matrix can never be as good, and it's not needed on a basic calc. No screen glare please.

My ideal modern calculator would be luminous, both the keyboard and the display. When the pixels are small enough, it does not matter much if it is dot-matrix or 7 segment. Dot matrix would enable alpha-prompts that are very useful when executing programs.

Quote:
Dual line display would be nice.

With a big enoughfine-pitched dot-matrix-display, any desired number of lines could be realised. Even an "infinite", scrolling display area.

Quote:
I want lots of useful dedicated keys with good engineering and base conversion functionality. Ditch the programming keys please.

I would rather wish to see user-defineable keys like the ones on modern touch-screen universal remote controls, that can be assigned to functions or programs via the PC (and Macintosh, please!). Programming could be done entirely on the host computer, I see absolutely no need to do it on the pocket computer.

Quote:
Keystroke programming is cool, you can remember how to use it after 6 months, so add that.

I don't, so keystroke programming is not useful at all to me. The last time when I really used keystroke programming was in the early eighties, but only because I had no alternative then.

Quote:
I want a battery life of at least a couple of years, and preferably dual solar battery power.

I would have no problem with rechargeable batteries either, maybe coupled to a solar cell so that no external charger is required.

Quote:
I want something with lots of rubber area on the bottom so it doesn't slide around on any surface.

Definetly! And not too lightweight either.

Quote:
I want labels I can read.

Yes. Luminous ones :-)

I have not touched an iPhone yet, but I could imagine that it would form a good basis for the "calculator of my dreams". A little bit larger to offer more space for "virtual" keys and more display area. And the whole thing fully configurable via computer. Able to store more than one configuration, so that it can mimic a four-banger with large keys and big 7-segment display today and a dedicated computer for some problem I have to solve at work tomorrow.

Greetings, Max


Hallo Max,

Quote:
Quote:
I for one want to see a *real* pocket calculator, one I can actually fit in my pocket, not Bill Hewlett's insanely big pocket.

Definitely! My favourite calculators are all very small, like the HP-25 ...

I have fond memories to this particular calc, but this never was a shirt pocket calc (not for long, at least ;).

However, I agree on almost everything you said about displays (I just prefer long battery life over luminosity).

Quote:
I would rather wish to see user-defineable keys like the ones on modern touch-screen universal remote controls, that can be assigned to functions or programs via the PC (and Macintosh, please!).

This collides head on with the request of many members for tactile feedback. You may have keys with programmable luminous labels (see a discussion here some months ago) on big keyboards, but I don't expect something in the size we need it and with next-to-zero power consumption in the next 5 years.

Just my 20 milli Euro again. Regards, Walter


Good morning!

Quote:
This collides head on with the request of many members for tactile feedback. You may have keys with programmable luminous labels (see a discussion here some months ago) on big keyboards, but I don't expect something in the size we need it and with next-to-zero power consumption in the next 5 years.

Tactile feedback: Well, having been forced (by HPs pricing policy of the seventies and eighties) to fight my way through school and univerity with Ti calculators, I was never spoilt by tactile feedback. Even if ou can feel the keyclick on a Ti-59, you always have to keep your eyes on the display, because you can't be sure if the figure that you keyed in appeares one time, zero times or five times in the display. So I am accustomed to "visible feedback" when using a calulator anyway.

But I just remebered the way, early computer terminals simulated the behaviour of typewriters to make it easier for typists to convert to computers: There was a "clicker device" somewere in the keyboard housing in which a solenoid pulled a piece of iron against a stop every time a keyress was detected. Not only did this generate the sound of a typewriter, but there was a little shake too, that you could feel through they keyboard. It should easily be possible to integrate a similar device (on a smaller scale and with much less noise!) into an iPhone-like calculator. (Did I just miss the chance to become a millionaire by not applying for a patent? ;-) )

Regarding power consumption: Modern mobile phones with backlit colour displays last for about one week between recharges. For me, it would not be a problem to connect it to my desktop computer via USB for recharging once in a while. And if it uses standard batteries (like the rechargeable AAA cells of an HP-48 or Ti Voyage 200) it is assured that there will still be replacement batteries awailable in ten or twenty years.

But now, back to work ... (no calculator required, computers are doing all the work)

Greetings, Max

Addition: I just saw this on Apple's website, it was only released yesterday, the RPN-Calculator that runs on the iPhone and the new iPod touch:
http://www.apple.com/webapps/calculate/belfryscicalc.html

So even if I dont't like to hear music via earphones, I think my next purchase might be one of these devices...


Edited: 12 Oct 2007, 4:48 a.m.

..., a celebration of the HP45, being a revamped HP42 with 32KRAM an I/O capable. It might look like the HP35S, no problem, just let the girl talk to the world, handle matrices and show readable, smart ALPHA messages. Quality? I remember reading about this word and its meaning, say, 25 years ago...

Luiz (Brazil)

Edited: 11 Oct 2007, 2:22 p.m.


You mean something like this? Jake Schwartz and I worked this up a good while ago. Presented this (along with some others) at HHC2007.


YES!

(drool, drool...)

HP, what are you waiting for? Purge the @!*%$%@# HP9G out and add this beauty as a 'low-end' graphics, for God´s sake!

Where do I sign? Where do I sign?

Cheers!

Luiz (Brazil)

Hi, Gene,

love to see a new design! I'm really looking forward to the conference DVD to see more -- and compare.

Best regards, Walter


Thanks. These were done over 18 months ago along with a high end business model.

The screen is the exact HP 48GII screen 131x64 pixels high.

The keys are the exact 12c keys.

The size of this model, believe it or not, is the exact 42S calculator size. It is a pioneer model.

Yes, it all fits. We checked.

Was fun.


Quote:

The keys are the exact 12c keys.



Gene,

I didn't see any "paint overs" on any of the keys!

B^)

P.s. do you recall what model of calculator you traded a 16c
to me ~10 years ago?
(you may answer by direct email, I'm just curious)

Ren

dona nobis pacem

Yepper. I would like two of the 45s please. With a real manual. The same size as a 42?

Maybe I'll take four.


Same size was the plan.

Note that the machine itself would be the same size as the 42s...same width, height, thickness.

That did not require any compromises to the keys - they are the current 12c keys.

It also did not require changing the screen - same 131x64 screen so available for the 48GII.

I'm pretty sure you guys can figure out the menu functionality from the key legends.


"TRIANGLES"? What's that one do?

And putting "O" (or any letter) on the Enter key is going to be problematic, isn't it? (I'm being picky . . . )

Edited: 11 Oct 2007, 6:58 p.m.


Quote:
"TRIANGLES"? What's that one do?

Given some combination of length of side(s) and measure of angle(s), find the others. It's a pet problem of Richard Nelson's.

Gene:

I love it and would buy one in a New York minute. In looking at the display, where are the keys to select the soft menus like on a 48GX?

Great Concept Calc,
Gerry


The top row of keys are used to select the soft menu keys, just like on the 42s. It does not "waste" a row of keys that are blank like the 48/49/50 series do.

And, that's merely a design tradeoff.

HP wake UP !!!!

Please put me down for one please.... Your design is great.

This was the other model Jake and I worked on. This model was built with alpha handling like the 42s rather than a character per key.

Questions? :-) We really enjoyed working on these.

Attendees at HHC2007 got to see these earlier.


Hyperbolic functions on a business calculator, you're going to scare off the wall street crowd :) I'd change that to some basic bond metrics: duration, etc..


Maybe HYPER being up a menu to let you change the machine's speed.

Defaults to 12c slowness but can be tweaked up for those who trust the results when they appear faster ;-)

- Pauli

Quote:
Hyperbolic functions on a business calculator, you're going to scare off the wall street crowd :) I'd change that to some basic bond metrics: duration, etc..


Now, now, Katie,

HYPE is as much a part of Wall Street as...

as...

BMW!

The R at the end makes it a verb (action/executable)!

B^)

Ren

dona nobis pacem

Although I respect very much the experienced judgements of "Lady" Katie ;-) - some scientific functions or statistical distributions like Trigonometrics and the Gamma Distribution family - and in addition to MIRR the real FMRR (refined from Coffin through Ed Keefe and McGuire) should be included via ML implementation.

Otherwise: Great work!!!

Best regards

Peter A. Gebhardt

My criteria list would include (in no particular order):

  • Pocket sized.
  • Not too heavy (but not as light as the current 35s which feel flimsy because of that).
  • Alphanumeric display - don't care if it is dot matrix or 16 segment.
  • Keystroke programming. Local labels definitely. Named programs optional - 26 letter labels is enough for most purposes.
  • Programming support for alpha operations at least for display purposes if not input as well.
  • Accurate operations. The 15c guaranteed +/-1 in the final digit for most operations and correct rounding for the basics. That is the minimum acceptable.
  • Some minimal form of IO via serial/USB/ethernet/whatever.
  • Memory: 32kb - 64kb of non-volatile RAM seems to be a sweet spot. More will be needed for internal operation but that can be volatile for all I care.
  • Walter does the keyboard and function layout :-)

Optionals but still nice:

  • Real time clock.
  • Display back light.


Things I don't much care about:

  • Graphics and plotting.
  • CAS.
  • Complex numbers.
  • Matricies and arrays.


- Pauli

I want it to hover, have a 100 year battery life, and bring me a pony!

;)


Quote:
I want it to hover, have a 100 year battery life, and bring me a pony!

;)



Shetland? Welsh? POA?

Latin American countries will have a burro option.

I agree with most of what you say, except about ditching the programing keys. I think the complex number key should be ditched, and all conversion functions should be shifted. I also disagree with it needing to fit in a shirt pocket. If you bend over with it in there it's going to fall out. In 12 years of engineering I have never once seen anyone walk around with a calculator in their shirt pocket. One more thing, STO should not be shifted.


Quote:
I agree with most of what you say, except about ditching the programing keys. I think the complex number key should be ditched, and all conversion functions should be shifted. I also disagree with it needing to fit in a shirt pocket. If you bend over with it in there it's going to fall out. In 12 years of engineering I have never once seen anyone walk around with a calculator in their shirt pocket. One more thing, STO should not be shifted.

It's not just to fit in your shirt pocket, smaller is better in many ways. Takes up less space on a crowded desk or lab bench. Fits better balanced on a catalog or book while doing calculations (and allows you to see more of the page). Less room in your bag or lab coat pocket. Less unwieldy when held in your hand for calculations etc

There is no reason to have "dead space" on the front panel of any calculator, anything else is poor or lazy design. Just keys and LCD please.

Dave.

HP 42SII please!

BTW I just upgraded my hp 42s to 32KB of memory yesterday.

(I found it's getting rather difficult to obtain classic 62256 SRAM in a SOIC28, so I did it.)

Some dissasembling photo is here.


I would really like a new release of the HP42s.

I would add the following improvements:
- I/O for backing up programs and controlling other devices, infrared for the printer.

- more memory (maybe even the capability to copy HP41 ROMS in a dedicated memory space)

- ALPHA keys à la HP41. I don't like the curent way to enter text

- a real time clock with time functions

If the new release runs on an emulated system, there must be no emulating issues and no drawback in speed. In comparision to the HP35s, the screen cover must be scratch-proof and anti-reflective.

And voilà, the perfect RPN calculator I am looking for!

Where did you get the new chip?


Hi;

old, crashed, destroyed and definitely unable to be rebuilt HP48G units. Their 32KRAM chips are good enough. I used at least three of them to upgrade three HP42S.

I have two HP42S with 32KRAM chips removed from an old PC sound card (not a Sound Blaster, need to find the pictures and references, though...). I remember I measured the power consumption after replacing the chips and did not find significant addition (my multimeter was not accurate enough...). Anyway, batteries lasted so too long that I believe the RAM chips were low-power.

Cheers.

Luiz (Brazil)

Nice Job!

Along with Stefan's question (where to find the 32K chip), I'd like to know how you keep the top and bottom case halves together? That question is for you too Paul :-)

Keeping the case securely closed (after the modification) is the main reason I haven't upgraded the memory in mine (yet).

Can you please comment on the two oscilliscope photos as well?

Again, nice job.

Matt


I got the chip from RS components.

http://www.rswww.co.jp/ (JAPAN)

http://www.rs-components.com/ (GLOBAL)

Quote:
how you keep the top and bottom case halves together?

It seems the other (rather slim) pins have enough friction to hold

the top and bottom together so far, and won't be a problem for daily use.

Quote:
Can you please comment on the two oscilliscope photos as well?

Appendix 1:

The hp42s has a crystal resonator and I want to know its frequency.

There is a testpoint next to the crystal that seems to be

a buffered output of the clock oscillator.

The photo is the waveform of that point showing its frequency of

32.78kHz (actually 32.768kHz measured by a frequency counter).



Appencix 2: (the photo is updated)

Taking a look on the PCB, I feel it lacks some bypassing

capacitor for stable operation, so I monitored the waveform of
the appropriate points by an oscilloscope.

And I found that the Vdd noise (while test program execution) is

acceptable and the RAM_WR waveform is not so bad.



Regards, Lyuka


Thank you for the additional information Lyuka. Much appreciated.

Matt

Okay, I'll admit it. My brain told me to vote for the 42s (and honestly, I would be ecstatic if a new one came out), but I followed my heart and wrote down the 71B.

I did this mainly because of the postings I've read here from Valentin and others that have impressed the heck out of me in terms of what that calc could do. I guess I never gave it any attention when it first came out, thinking it was a poor version of a small computer. Yet when I see some of the programs that have been written for it, the ability it has to deal with external I/O (I'm an embedded systems guy, so I like to be able to control and evaluate I/O), the precision of the calculator, the Forth ROM, etc., well, I'm VERY impressed.

Granted, it could be replaced by a couple of good emulators on a small tablet or OQO or something, but there's still something pleasing about holding something like that. When I was fondling one at HHC2007, marveling at the crystal clear display, etc., I was more smitten.

I may have to go out and buy one on eBay someday. I don't think HP will ever make a clone of the 71B (or, it's probably more accurate to say that I could see HP making a 42s clone before a 71B clone), but it sure would be nice to have one.

(sigh)

thanks,
bruce


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  HP 50g - displaying result in engineering format Sean Freeman 10 780 11-24-2013, 05:44 AM
Last Post: C.Ret
  program result display Richard Berler 2 240 10-02-2013, 06:57 PM
Last Post: Richard Berler
  Back to School/Work/Other Calculator Poll Eddie W. Shore 63 4,424 09-12-2013, 06:03 AM
Last Post: bhtooefr
  Poll: SandMath and 41Z Overlays anyone? Ángel Martin 20 1,299 05-20-2013, 04:13 PM
Last Post: aurelio
  Getting back to the CL Geir Isene 6 463 03-20-2013, 07:02 PM
Last Post: Geir Isene
  [43S]Top row poll (until Monday, 4.2.13, 13:13 UTC) Walter B 175 6,822 02-04-2013, 09:38 AM
Last Post: Andrés C. Rodríguez (Argentina)
  What are the most popular functions? (Poll until 18.12.) Walter B 62 2,081 12-18-2012, 08:18 AM
Last Post: Walter B
  Here is a poll again Walter B 80 2,596 12-03-2012, 03:59 AM
Last Post: Walter B
  Alternate poll Paul Dale 14 790 11-29-2012, 01:29 PM
Last Post: Eddie W. Shore
  HP-11C Back Screws John Swisher 0 212 09-12-2012, 10:52 AM
Last Post: John Swisher

Forum Jump: