New HP non-programmable calc?

[DaveJ]

My post just a minute ago about Walters excellent calc mock-up's got me thinking again...

What is the likelihood of HP producing a decent non-programmbale basic scientific in the new retro styling a.la the 35S?

I know the market for that sort of calc is a throw-away market, you can get one for $2, but that's not the point.

I only need a basic scientific calc for my everyday use, and I'd love to have a top quality one in some sort of new retro styling.

I know the answer to that one is practically ZIP, but it's good to dream...

Dave.

[designnut]

I have long felt the need for a students/beginners/common mans
calculator. I think they could lose hyperbolics, some
programmability RPN style would be nice. I hate to abandon
the field to parenthesis and would like to see implicit
multiplication used. I see Casio uses some. I suggest parentheesis
and textbook formulas are one reason we are so far behind in
math. When I first used the 35 I quickly rearranged all formulas
and thought of them as keystroke sequences rather than formulas.
I submit that is needed. Sam

[DaveJ]

Quote:

---

I have long felt the need for a students/beginners/common mans
calculator. I think they could lose hyperbolics, some
programmability RPN style would be nice. I hate to abandon
the field to parenthesis and would like to see implicit
multiplication used. I see Casio uses some. I suggest parentheesis
and textbook formulas are one reason we are so far behind in
math. When I first used the 35 I quickly rearranged all formulas
and thought of them as keystroke sequences rather than formulas.
I submit that is needed. Sam

---

Here are some things I would like to see:
- Loose the HYP key (at least as a primary)
- have selectable RPN, algebraic, or formula entry to satisfy everyone
- By all means have some advanced stuff like a solver for any variable, integration or matrix functions etc, but not at the expense of primary keys or some convoluted menu system.
- Have good easy access base conversion
- Maximise the primary keys for basic functions
- Have an ENG button
- A nice 7 segment display please, with a proper distinguishable exponent display. Dual 7 seg/dot matrix is fine.

Dave.

[Mike Reed]

Casio fx-260solar:

PRO: It has all the function one would need for a pocket scientific calculator, and is solar powered - no battery worries. Slide on hard case. Very small, lightweight, looks good, good tactile feedback. Inexpensive; MSRP $9.99, but they are available for $7 to $15.

CON: Algebraic entry, not programmable. only one "memory".

Altogether - worth a look. HP would do well to make a similar, but RPN, cheap, throwaway for "everyday use".

If HP made a similar RPN unit, I would be happy to drop $40-45 for one.

Edited: 20 Mar 2008, 9:12 a.m.

[DaveJ]

Quote:

---

Casio fx-260solar:

PRO: It has all the function one would need for a pocket scientific calculator, and is solar powered - no battery worries. Slide on hard case. Very small, lightweight, looks good, good tactile feedback. Inexpensive; MSRP $9.99, but they are available for $7 to $15.

CON: Algebraic entry, not programmable. only one "memory".

---

Add to that no base conversion.
But yes, a very nice unit. That's the kind of size and functionality I'm talking about.

Quote:

---

Altogether - worth a look. HP would do well to make a similar, but RPN, cheap, throwaway for "everyday use".

If HP made a similar RPN unit, I would be happy to drop $40-45 for one.

---

That's what I'm talking about. Although I think it should be combined RPN/algebraic.
The current HP non-programmable scientific offerings are just awful.

Dave.

[Thomas Radtke]

I'd like to see a HP-45 w/ minor modifications. But then, the 45 exists and I have one, always ready to use! :-)

The few answers already indicate: Too many conflicting ideas prohibit the design of a single non-programmable model. I wouldn't buy one with e.g. an "RPN" annunciator. Guess why :-).

[DaveJ]

Quote:

---

I'd like to see a HP-45 w/ minor modifications. But then, the 45 exists and I have one, always ready to use! :-)

The few answers already indicate: Too many conflicting ideas prohibit the design of a single non-programmable model.

---

I greatly doubt that.
No one is going to get their dream calc, ever, it just doesn't happen.
But a good looking, good quality basic scientific is a piece of cake to do. Just bring back the retro design and put some basic functions on it.
It ain't rocket science if they decide to do it.

Dave.

[Walter B]

Quote:

---

But a good looking, good quality basic scientific is a piece of cake to do. Just bring back the retro design and put some basic functions on it. It ain't rocket science

---

OK, Dave, we are anxious to see your proposal. Must be trivially easy for you since you claimed recently:

Quote:

---

Hardware, calculators are. Trivial details, be all things other.

---

Looking forward to your design.

[DaveJ]

Quote:

---

OK, Dave, we are anxious to see your proposal. Must be trivially easy for you since you claimed recently:

Quote: Hardware, calculators are. Trivial details, be all things other.

Looking forward to your design.

---

Nice try.
I'm a one-man-band, HP are a billion dollar corporation with existing tooling in place to make it "trivially easy".
I don't make proposals and photoshop concepts, I makes real things.
Here is what a one-man-band can do in under 100 hours using off-the-shelf parts:

Dave.

[Marcus von Cube, Germany]

Awful! (Edit: Should read "awesome", see below)

Do you really wear it? Tell us more about this!

Edited: 22 Mar 2008, 1:25 p.m. after one or more responses were posted

[DaveJ]

Quote:

---

Awful!

---

Really?
I think it's quite beautiful in a nerdy sort of way.

Quote:

---

Do you really wear it?

---

Yes, but not all the time.
I used to wear a CFX-400, but they now cost about as much as a HP-01, and you don't get the satisfaction of saying you built it yourself.

Quote:

---

Tell us more about this!

---

Why would you want to know more about something so awful? :->
There is plenty of stuff in the archives around December I think.

Dave.

[Chuck]

"awful"

What!!!!!!!?

I truly hope this is sarcasm, because I think this is a work of art. If I had but one-fifth of Daves ability.

Edited: 21 Mar 2008, 4:23 p.m. after one or more responses were posted

[Marcus von Cube, Germany]

Sorry, I'm obviously not a native speaker. What is the right word to express my astonishment?

[DaveJ]

Quote:

---

Sorry, I'm obviously not a native speaker. What is the right word to express my astonishment?

---

In Australia the correct term could be "struth!"

BTW, for those of you playing along at home, I'm finally back onto doing something with the uWatch. See HERE for a bit more details.
Not much there yet though, but it will eventually all get up.

Dave.

[Walter B]

Impressive, so far!

Can you tell us the dimensions? And since you have to use menus extensively (few keys plus programmability), what's the menu structure?

[DaveJ]

Quote:

---

Impressive, so far!

Can you tell us the dimensions? And since you have to use menus extensively (few keys plus programmability), what's the menu structure?

---

Size is 54mm x 43mm x 20mm at it's thickest point (the LCD). That includes the band support extrusions.


The keys are relatively light tough with a positive tactile action, and are spaced far enough apart to prevent hitting adjacent keys.




Example menu structure is in the photo section, but the full list (so far) is:




Press MENU once:

1/x X^2 SQRT

LOG 10^x LOGe



MENU again:

SIN COS TAN

ARC HYP (DEG/RAD)



MENU again:

PI X^Y e^x

R>P P>R //



MENU again:

% %CH X!

nPr nCr



MENU again:

Record Play Constant



MENU again wraps back.



Simply press any on the 6 keys below the LCD that corresponds to the option you want.

It's still work in progress though.

Dave.

Edited: 21 Mar 2008, 6:16 p.m.

[Walter B]

Thanks! I understand your wish for a primary LOG in my proposals better now. BTW you may save space by calling "LOGe" "LN". And I'd expect "e^x" nearer to "LN", not interrupted by trigs.

Also, you seem to be a non-statistic guy (I've seen x!, nPr, nCr, but no sums, mean, std. deviation, L.R., forecasting). These tedious sample statistics were crucial reasons for me and many other students saving our scarce money for expensive calcs in the seventies. I still rate these as one of the great benefits of calcs.

2 more questions:

Quote:

---

PI  X^Y  e^x


R>P P>R  //

---

What's "//" ?

There must be a similar menu structure under "MODE". Can you unveal this, too?

[DaveJ]

Quote:

---

Thanks! I understand your wish for a primary LOG in my proposals better now. BTW you may save space by calling "LOGe" "LN". And I'd expect "e^x" nearer to "LN", not interrupted by trigs.

---

I know, but I only have 6 menu options on each screen, and I wanted my (personally) most often used keys on the first menu. I couldn't bear to drop 1/X, X^2, or SQRT, so that left only three.

I'll probably end up moving the parallel key to that menu, so the two might meet up after all.

Quote:

---

Also, you seem to be a non-statistic guy (I've seen x!, nPr, nCr, but no sums, mean, std. deviation, L.R., forecasting). These tedious sample statistics were crucial reasons for me and many other students saving our scarce money for expensive calcs in the seventies. I still rate these as one of the great benefits of calcs.

---

Correct, I have very little use for calculator statistics in my field of electronics design.

Any stats I need to do are better done in Excel.



If stats are needed then I think they may be best taken out of the calculator menu and have their own dedicated system that allows easier entry and review of data entered etc.

Quote:

---

2 more questions:

What's "//" ?

---

It's a "parallel" function, used extensively in electronics design.

(X*Y)/(X+Y)

Only one calculator I know of has this a primary function key, the Casio FX-61F, a calc designed specifically for electronics design.
The parallel function is actually an operator and has the same precedence as multiply and divide.

Quote:

---

There must be a similar menu structure under "MODE". Can you unveal this, too?

---

Mode simply switches between the watch modes, just like normal Timex/Casio watch etc. Currently there is only Time/Date mode, calculator mode, and setup mode.

Setup mode allows you to set the date and time, calculator mode (RPN/ALG), LCD time-out, 12/24hr mode, and calibrating the clock frequency (so you can "tweak" the watch accuracy).



The mode key also wakes the calc up and switches on the LCD. Unfortunately the LCD can't be left on, as it draws a few milliamps, so that would drain the 2032 batteries in hundred hours or two.

The calc picks up exactly were it left off when it went to sleep, even if you are in the middle of a calculation.



Dave.

Edited: 22 Mar 2008, 3:59 a.m.

[Mike Reed]

BAWWWWWWW!!! I WANT ONE, AND I WANT IT NOW!!!

I'm gonna hold my breath and turn BLUE until you give ALL the details! ;o) Parts list, schematics, construction photos, programming, EVERYTHING!! (We have ways of making you talk!) LOL

Seriously, Dave, very impressive! For an one-off, home built, it just don't get much better than this! And all from off-the-shelf parts, too! Congratulations on a job well-done!

[DaveJ]

Quote:

---

BAWWWWWWW!!! I WANT ONE, AND I WANT IT NOW!!!

I'm gonna hold my breath and turn BLUE until you give ALL the details! ;o) Parts list, schematics, construction photos, programming, EVERYTHING!! (We have ways of making you talk!) LOL

Seriously, Dave, very impressive! For an one-off, home built, it just don't get much better than this! And all from off-the-shelf parts, too! Congratulations on a job well-done!

---

Thanks.

Schematic is already up as the background pic ;-)



I've got enough parts on hand to build two more, and the wife wants me to recoup some money, so I'll probably build them up and list them on That Auction Site as a bit of a test to see if there is any interest there. Might give me an idea as to how much something like this could go for in built-up form.



So if you want serial #1 and #2 you might have to keep an eye out!

Dave.

[Egan Ford]

Quote:

---

Sorry, I'm obviously not a native speaker. What is the right word to express my astonishment?

---

Perhaps you meant "awesome". http://www.answers.com/awesome

[Marcus von Cube, Germany]

So I must have made an awful mistake. What was the right word? "Awesome?" I should make a note of it. ;-)

[Walter B]

Quote:

---

I'm a one-man-band, HP are a billion dollar corporation with existing tooling in place to make it "trivially easy". I don't make proposals and photoshop concepts, I makes real things.

---

OK, one point for you, Dave. Shame on me forgetting you made this precious! But only one point, because you're off topic: I asked you for your design of a non-programmable calc, and you delivered a watch (though a fine toy for dry nerds). Nice try. BTW, I'm a one-man-band, too. IMHO, HP won't sell a lot of sandwich calcs with open bolts. Such may be a very early engineering prototype necessary to check functionality. Nothing for the customer yet. The customer will see (and buy) the design with the (important) hardware concealed. And remember you claimed:

Quote:

---

But a good looking, good quality basic scientific is a piece of cake to do. Just bring back the retro design and put some basic functions on it. It ain't rocket science

---

So, please, Dave.

[DaveJ]

Quote:

---

OK, one point for you, Dave. Shame on me forgetting you made this precious! But only one point, because you're off topic: I asked you for your design of a non-programmable calc, and you delivered a watch (though a fine toy for dry nerds). Nice try. BTW, I'm a one-man-band, too. IMHO, HP won't sell a lot of sandwich calcs with open bolts. Such may be a very early engineering prototype necessary to check functionality. Nothing for the customer yet. The customer will see (and buy) the design with the (important) hardware concealed. And remember you claimed:

Quote:But a good looking, good quality basic scientific is a piece of cake to do. Just bring back the retro design and put some basic functions on it. It ain't rocket science

So, please, Dave.

---

I suck at photoshop, so I won't even try.

But I don't need to, you've done it for me, your 44S will do nicely as an example:

But I would make a few changes:

- move the E key to the R/S position, and drop the R/S key.

- Change the E key to a primary ENG function.

- Change the E+ key to primary LOG

- Change the Up/Down and XEQ keys to basic scientific ones

- Loose the menus etc

you get the idea...

All HP need to do is simply take the 35S and/or the 12C and change the keys, overlay and software to make it a basic scientific.
They have done all the hard work on the various engineering and production aspects required. So I stand by my statement that it's a piece of cake as far as getting a product out the door.

I don't really care too much about the exact key placement, functionality, and finer details, I just want HP to produce a top quality non-programmable scientific calc that doesn't look like the other toys they have produced lately.

I could come up with detailed design proposal, but like I said, that's not what I like to do.

Dave.

Edited: 21 Mar 2008, 5:25 a.m.

[Walter B]

Quote:

---

I suck at photoshop, so I won't even try.

But I don't need to, you've done it for me, your 44S will do nicely as an example: ... But I would make a few changes:

- move the E key to the R/S position, and drop the R/S key.

- Change the E key to a primary ENG function.

- Change the E+ key to primary LOG

---

I understand what you want so far.

Quote:

---

- Change the Up/Down and XEQ keys to basic scientific ones

- Loose the menus etc

you get the idea...

---

That's manager's talk, not specific. That's like saying: take this or that processor plus at least 1MB of memory and get it connected, take the routines out of the previous model X, you get the idea...

Quote:

---

All HP need to do is simply take the 35S and/or the 12C and change the keys, overlay and software to make it a basic scientific.
They have done all the hard work on the various engineering and production aspects required. So I stand by my statement that it's a piece of cake as far as getting a product out the door.

---

As above. Maybe sufficient to get "a product", not the top quality product you want. Plus, a relabeled 35s is the size a basic scientific had 35 years ago...

Quote:

---

I don't really care too much about the exact key placement, functionality, and finer details, I just want HP to produce a top quality non-programmable scientific calc that doesn't look like the other toys they have produced lately.

I could come up with detailed design proposal, but like I said, that's not what I like to do.

---

As above -- got your message. Real life, however, requires real statements, be it in electronics, software, or design. While I am confident electronics is covered sufficiently at/by HP (and software is upgradeable in worst case), the design of the products produced lately does not meet my requirements and expectations. That's the reason I'm creating some proposals (at a basic level, without photoshop) and posting them here.

Edited: 21 Mar 2008, 4:55 p.m.

[Jason Artz]

Aw...esome!