HP-35S Case



#2

Hello,

I got an HP-35S a few months ago. Aside from the occasional keystroke miss, which I attribute to entering data too quickly, as it occurs when I am in a hurry, I like it.

It is a good machine for my everyday calculations, and you don't have to worry if it gets lost or stolen.

I noticed the case is handy and withstands abuse. It is better than the one that came with the 33S. I also noticed it fits Pioneers. Can it be ordered separately, as were its predecessors? Has anyone tried?

JuanJ


#3

Hello,

yes, a seller of TAS offers these HP zipper cases from time to time.

HTH

Raymond

#4

Quote:
occasional keystroke miss, which I attribute to entering data too quickly
It's definitely not "entering data too quickly", the keyboard/its handling is not good enough. Try to miss a keystroke on the HP48 - the last "HP" calculator.

#5

I agree with Reth. At first it didn't bother me either, but as I got more fluent with it's use, it has become more of a problem. It could definitely use a keyboard input buffer.

#6

Quote:
Try to miss a keystroke on the HP48 - the last "HP" calculator.

The HP48-series is great as long as one doesn't mind:



1. The worst LCD display quality that anyone has ever put on a graphing calculator. Very fuzzy, very easily damaged.

2. Overpriced, underfeatured, unreliable, proprietary memory expansion cards (vs. SD cards).

3. Slow speed, and Saturn-only (vs. ARM) capability.

4. No real CAS built-in. Must use third-party.

5. Non-upgradable firmware.

6. The poorest color schemes ever put on any calculator (other than the HP38G!) with respect to contrast and legibility.



I've had an HP48SX since 1991, plus two HP48GXs since 1997. It seemed like a good idea at the time.


#7

Quote:
1. The worst LCD display quality that anyone has ever put on a graphing calculator. Very fuzzy, very easily damaged.

If you're comparing with the 50G, my 50G's display is just as unreliable - six missing pixel rows and increasing with hard resets. My 48SX still works fine.


Quote:
2. Overpriced, underfeatured, unreliable, proprietary memory expansion cards (vs. SD cards).

This thread started about the 35s, which doesn't have any external interfaces - but memory for loads of programmes to be lost with hours of re-typing. (Paul Dale's 710-line, ~8kb game took me many hours to type in).


Quote:
3. Slow speed, and Saturn-only (vs. ARM) capability.

This thread started about the 35s, so just to be clear it is not an ARM unit. It's actually quite slow.


Quote:
6. The poorest color schemes ever put on any calculator (other than the HP38G!) with respect to contrast and legibility.

I agree WRT the G series, but like the S-series orange/blue scheme.

That all said, I think the biggest gripe remains the keyboard. I think many would welcome a 50G with a 48S/G type keyboard.
#8

Ok, since we're off-topic already, I'd like to add my point of view.

Quote:
The HP48-series is great as long as one doesn't mind:



1. The worst LCD display quality that anyone has ever put on a graphing calculator. Very fuzzy, very easily damaged.

If you mean the hardware durability:

No, none of my _various_ HP-48 units has a damaged display,

except for the ones where the previous owners managed to break it.

Apart from that, the LCD of every calculator can break if

one misues the unit, or drops it, regardless of the brand.

If you mean the LCD contrast: Yes, the SX has one of the poorest

LCDs, beaten only by the OmniGO 100 and the Olivetti Quaderno,

the GX LCD is much better, and the latest production runs with

high-contrast LCD are simply excellent!

Quote:

2. Overpriced, underfeatured, unreliable, proprietary memory expansion cards (vs. SD cards).


When the HP-48 came out, every memory card of every vendor for every
machine (calc or PC) was expensive compared to today's SD cards.

And since they (HP RAM cards) are not built anymore,

they tend to get somewhat more expensive.

Quote:
3. Slow speed...

Not true. Just try SpeedUI.

Apart from that, it's hard to compare an ARM core with the Saturn.

However I managed to make a SuDoKu solver for the GX which runs

nearly as fast as compiled C programs on the 50g, so what?

Quote:

4. No real CAS built-in. Must use third-party.


Exactly. Use 3rd party, when you need it. I never needed a CAS,

so it would be a waste of space if it were built-in.
Quote:
5. Non-upgradable firmware.

No need to upgrade, since the GX has a handful of well-known bugs only.

Compare that to the endless bug lists of the 49g/50g.

Apart from that, you _can_ upgrade certain parts of the OS, see SpeedUI.

Quote:


6. The poorest color schemes ever put on any calculator (other than the HP38G!) with respect to contrast and legibility.


Again no! The poorest color schema was on the 49g: Dark blue

and dark red on metallic blue. Who had _that_ sillysilly idea?

Ah, I forgot the 6s (non-solar), which was similar. Or the 33s...

Quote:



I've had an HP48SX since 1991, plus two HP48GXs since 1997. It seemed like a good idea at the time.


I have the HP-48SX with serial 3003A00xxx, bought new

when it came out. Currently I'm using a GX with B/W LCD:-)

#9

Hello,

Having used (and frequently abused) a 48GX for years, I agree with Raymond. The last true HP calculator.

Regarding missed keystrokes, it only happens when I am entering data too quickly. The 35S never misses a keystroke at my "normal" typing speed.

Thank you for the info.


JuanJ


#10

Hi Juan,

Your thread has been hijacked by 48 lovers/haters :)))

All other HP RPNs I have, have keyboard buffers. The algebraic 20S being the only HP I have that doesn't, but it's fast enough not to need it - the 35S isn't.

I will cautiously say that, like me, as you become more proficient with the 35S's use, the lack of a buffer will be more apparent.

By the way, here's a link to Pauli's 35S Bug List with other issues to beware of. (You probably knew this).

Many of these bugs are avoidable or not an issue for me in daily use, and I quite like and enjoy using the 35S. However, the missed keystrokes do "catch me out" occasionally and is an irritation.

Bart


#11

Hello Bart,

Yes, the thread was hijacked. Fortunately it happened after my question was answered :-) Glad to see a simple question made everybody come up with interesting opinions/insights.

I think I am begining to feel the buffer lack. I am missing strokes often. However, slowing down helps. Not an excellent solution, but it helps.

Other than the buffer, the 35S is a good calculator. I was aware of the bugs and the sluggish speed; the latter was not a concern (has not been so far) to me. I needed an all-purpose, replaceable RPN calculator for everyday use, and the 35S fit the bill. Interestingly enough, many people I deal with cannot figure it out even in ALG mode, an added benefit. Now older models can stay at home.

Regarding the 48, it is so different that you either get used to it and appreciate its features or you don't and just hate it. RPL is efficient and fun to use but requires some changes in one's mindset, in my humble opinion. Again, either you learn your way into its subtleties or not.

JuanJ

Edited: 3 Sept 2009, 7:13 p.m.


#12

Hi,


Quote:
Other than the buffer, the 35S is a good calculator.

Yes, and it seems to be of a good construction that will outlast it's competitors. And it looks good, always attracting interest when it's on my desk but keeping alg calc users from borrowing it :).

My first HP was the 28C, so to me RPL is quite nice. Apart from loop control & graphics, it is almost RPN programming without line numbers, you still use the stack and the calculator functions acting on what's on the stack. And the advantage of an "unlimited" stack. I find that I have to put quite a bit of effort into keeping track of a 4-level stack when programming "traditional" RPN.

Bart.
#13

Quote:
The HP48-series is great as long as one doesn't mind:



1. The worst LCD display quality that anyone has ever put on a graphing calculator. Very fuzzy, very easily damaged.

2. Overpriced, underfeatured, unreliable, proprietary memory expansion cards (vs. SD cards).

3. Slow speed, and Saturn-only (vs. ARM) capability.

4. No real CAS built-in. Must use third-party.

5. Non-upgradable firmware.

6. The poorest color schemes ever put on any calculator (other than the HP38G!) with respect to contrast and legibility.




Wow. I have been using my HP-48SX almost daily since 1991 and I don't mind any of those "issues". To tell you the truth, I can't say I've even noticed (or in some cases needed) them.

Steve


#14

I bought a 2nd hand 48SX with a faulty Row and Faulty display, very bad treated...

I disassembled it, did a deep clean...reassembled it and it seems near new and of course it works perfect!!!

I found that I have a nice serial number in a 48SX... 2952A00XXX

Regards.

#15

I'll agree with the thought that, for its era of more than 15 years ago, the HP48 series was notable and top-line.

I only question the frequent allegation that it *still* occupies that spot. It doesn't. It's not even close. Today's HP hardware/firmware is far superior, and a lot lower in cost too.


#16

Today's HP calc hardware is pathetic and good for nothing, hugely overpriced for the piece of rubbish it is. There is strong demand for HP48 among surveyors and no one likes 49- and later models.


#17

Quote:
no one likes 49- and later models

If you have observed this forum at all, surely you see that many folks like the current 50g. I'm not an RPL man myself, but for those who are, the satisfaction level seems to be very high.


#18

I have 4 relevant calculators: an early HP-48SX, a HP-49G+, a HP-50g, and a HP-48G+. (The first three were all purchased new.)

HP-48SX: very powerful, and its matrix-handling ability was genuinely useful to me at the time. The keyboard was also terrific. However the low contrast of the display coupled with the extreme slowness of the interface made many advanced features hard to use. The equation writer was incredibly slow, and writing programs took for ever due to the slow editing speed.

HP-49G+: much nicer display; much faster; far more facilities; hopeless keyboard. In practice, unusable.

HP-50g: all the advantages of the HP-49G+ along with a proper keyboard. I prefer the HP-48 layout and keyboard "feel" but that (to me) is a small point. The keyboard on my HP-50g is completely reliable. In every other regard the HP-50g equals or surpasses my HP-48SX comfortably - as it should, given the time between the two releases.

HP-48G+: like the HP-48SX but with a clearer display and much faster in use. Choosing between this and the HP-50g is hard. Based on this machine I can see why people are so fond of the HP-48 series. I think there's a rational basis for preferring either the HP-48xxx or HP-50g depending on exactly what one's needs are.

My opinion: the HP-50g is a great machine and so is the HP-48G+ (and therefore other later models in the HP-48 series). Although I can understand people putting either model first, I can't really relate to fierce condemnation of whichever model they put second!

Nigel

#19

Quote:
surely you see that many folks like the current 50g
I said surveyors, e.g. professionals, not just folks.

Note when the HP41 came around it killed TI and everything around. HP48 went the same way but never got to level the king (41) in terms of innovations.
To me HP41 is never gonna be matched as of level of importance (innovation, quality, usefulness etc.) as far as handheld calculators are concerned. It was *the pioneer*

The HP48 was the working horse (and still is). It was there at the right time and provided what was necessary.
Cheers

#20

"...and when there was no crawdad to be found, we ate sand."


-Raising Arizona

I use my 32S but I'm going to dig out my 48gx which I have not used in 5 or 6 years.

#21

My $0.02:

Quote:

1. The worst LCD display quality that anyone has ever put on a graphing calculator. Very fuzzy, very easily damaged.


Well, I guess that is subjective to some degree. The contrast isn't so great, but mine is definitely not fuzzy.
Quote:
2. Overpriced, underfeatured, unreliable, proprietary memory expansion cards (vs. SD cards).
I got mine for less than half of a 50g. Underfeatured? It is so feature-rich, it boggles my feeble mind.
Quote:
3. Slow speed, and Saturn-only (vs. ARM) capability.
We agree on this, it is maddeningly slow.
Quote:
4. No real CAS built-in. Must use third-party.
I must not know what this is all about, since I thought the 48 series did have the capability of manipulating symbolic expressions.
Quote:
5. Non-upgradable firmware.
Means nothing to me. I expect the manufacturer to build it right the first time. Silly me.
Quote:
6. The poorest color schemes ever put on any calculator (other than the HP38G!) with respect to contrast and legibility.
Funny, I bought the SX because I dislike the GX color scheme. If the SX color scheme is horrible, so is that of 32sii, 20s, 21s.

#22

Quote:
1. The worst LCD display quality that anyone has ever put on a graphing calculator. Very fuzzy, very easily damaged.

2. Overpriced, underfeatured, unreliable, proprietary memory expansion cards (vs. SD cards).

3. Slow speed, and Saturn-only (vs. ARM) capability.

4. No real CAS built-in. Must use third-party.

5. Non-upgradable firmware.

6. The poorest color schemes ever put on any calculator (other than the HP38G!) with respect to contrast and legibility.


7. No joy stick to play games and mouse support, ah?


1. The b&w display is brilliant and the big system font is better visible than on the toys(hp49-hp50). As reliable as anything, I've got a few from the first years of production till the last - no problems at all. And all these have seen tough times out at the field in any weather conditions.

2. These calculators were and still are worth their weight in gold. They payed back their price thousands of times over the years.

3. Speed has never been a problem. Problem is unreliable keyboard.

4. CAS? you must be kidding. HP48 is a professional tool and not algebra school teacher or OS for playing games like TIs.

5. What about slide rules? Are there upgradeable ones? What is the effect of the "upgradeable" firmware? The fact that you can replace one buggy FW with the next one etc etc?

6. The colour scheme is a matter of personal taste. To my eyes HP48's is perfect and I for one like the 48G colours more then the 48S'

Edited: 2 Sept 2009, 12:46 a.m.


#23

Quote:




7. No joy stick to play games and mouse support, ah?



8. No touch screen :)


#24

9. No bluetooth

10. No Wi-Fi

11. No GPS

Just "horrible, horrible" as in Seinfeld

;)


#25

Quote:
9. No bluetooth

10. No Wi-Fi

11. No GPS

Just "horrible, horrible" as in Seinfeld

;)

11. GPS...HP-GPS connection yes, it exists ;)

http://dadima.chat.ru/cables.html

#26

I have several HP48s that I'll gladly sell to you for their weight in gold. Or was that just more nonsense?


#27

Quote:
I have several HP48s that I'll gladly sell to you for their weight in gold. Or was that just more nonsense?

And that's another good point for the HP-48:

It may be worth the weight in gold, but it isn't _that_ expensive to obtain;-)
#28

Quote:
Or was that just more nonsense?
Nonsense? I'm not trespassing your area, mate.
#29

Mike,

You made a similar post recently which nearly provoked me to replying. At least this time, you have hit on a few better points :)

The worst LCD display? Well, I agree that the S series displays aren't exactly high contrast but in well over 10 years using G series, it never once occured to me that the display was bad.

Fuzzy display? None of mine are like that. Fuzzy implies out of focus and I'm not sure how that would happen in an LCD. Do they have lenses?

Easily damaged? Again, none of mine have ever suffered any damage. I'm not in the habit of throwing them into cement mixers but I am in the habit of applying a bit of sense when storing the calc - and the 48 series cases are amongst the best for ease of inserting/removing the calc.

Memory cards? You can hardly blame the 48 series for not having SD as the technology didn't exist. By this comparison, do we start unfairly criticising earlier calcs that don't feature technology "x" when it didn't even exist at the time? However, the main point with memory cards is that their usage is definitly in the minority. If you took numbers of calcs sold and memory cards sold, I bet you'd only find a very small percentage using the cards. It simply doesn't matter for most users.

Speed? Agreed, some operations can be painfully slow. However, a solution to most of these lies in Raymond's superb SpeedUI which streamlines many front-end elements. Strongly recommended. But, even with the slow features of the 48 series, the calc is still quite a lot faster than probably all calcs before it.

Saturn only? Well, that is what it was built on. Is that a fault of the calc? How many 50G users are programming native Arm code? Not many I expect.

No CAS? Didn't CAS start as a 48 lib which HP then took on board? If yes, then it can be installed. The only time I've ever needed CAS was for programming a solution to a challenge on this forum.

Non-upgradable firmware? Well, no. This is desirable for some situations but there is no need for a calc to have it. In a way, I prefer not to have it as it puts extra pressure on getting the bugs sorted before shipping.

Poorest colour scheme? Last time you said something like "west coast arty"!! Not sure what you meant by that but I quite like the violet/green scheme so this is subjective. I have certainly never had problems with contrast or legibility and it is significantly better than the vile scheme on the 49G! If you think the 48G is bad, try a 22S under overhead lighting.

I think that covers your points. The original 48 series has faults but it also has features going for it that have been lost since the 49G. Like others, I think the GX is the last great proper HP calc and I still use it on a daily basis.

Some other bullet points for and against 48GX or 50G

50G has bigger display
50G has numerous software enhancements that are really valuable
50G has benefit of USB connection
50G is a lot faster all round
50G eats batteries and needs a backup battery because of this
50G has a good keyboard but still not as good as the GX
GX keyboard layout is far superior to the 50G
GX menus are not so deeply nested as on 50G
GX doesn't do infuriating mode switching like the 50G does
50G has lots of keyboard kludges - shift hold combinations - that exist as far as I am concerned to compensate for the poor keyboard layout

and now doubt many points more that aren't springing to mind right now.

It is a matter of great regret to me that HP didn't continue developing the 48GX in the right direction. The 49G design was such a backwards step and we are still suffering with the legacy of that. I read on hpcalc.org that the keyboard layout was changed to make it less intimidating! Well, if the removal of 4 keys and the subsequent function changes achieved that, all well and good but it was done at the expense of alienating a large swathe of existing users. The 50G is undoubtedly a good calc but if it hadn't suffered from the poor decisions concerning its keyboard and menu structure, it would be absolutely incredible.

Anyway, I've rambled enough...

Mark

Quote:


The HP48-series is great as long as one doesn't mind:



1. The worst LCD display quality that anyone has ever put on a graphing calculator. Very fuzzy, very easily damaged.

2. Overpriced, underfeatured, unreliable, proprietary memory expansion cards (vs. SD cards).

3. Slow speed, and Saturn-only (vs. ARM) capability.

4. No real CAS built-in. Must use third-party.

5. Non-upgradable firmware.

6. The poorest color schemes ever put on any calculator (other than the HP38G!) with respect to contrast and legibility.



I've had an HP48SX since 1991, plus two HP48GXs since 1997. It seemed like a good idea at the time.



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  HP Prime Tutorial #4 is up (CASE/CHOOSE/INPUT) Eddie W. Shore 1 716 11-15-2013, 07:32 AM
Last Post: Davi Ribeiro de Oliveira
  Leather case for the HP-Prime Karl-Ludwig Butte 9 1,660 10-19-2013, 06:08 PM
Last Post: Eddie W. Shore
  HP-50G belt clip case Dan Lewis 6 1,168 04-17-2013, 10:51 AM
Last Post: B ENFINGER
  HP 39gii: CASE Syntax Eddie W. Shore 3 842 02-20-2013, 03:58 PM
Last Post: Eddie W. Shore
  Silver paint for HP 35 case Anoop Sahal 2 791 12-26-2012, 10:17 AM
Last Post: Anoop Sahal
  HP calc case thermoplastic types Duane Hess 2 752 11-25-2012, 10:50 PM
Last Post: Paul Berger (Canada)
  Found HP 65 with clear see thru case davefr 24 3,311 11-13-2012, 10:41 AM
Last Post: Bruce Larrabee
  HP 11C/12C/15C/16C case Philippe Cairic 4 1,149 11-06-2012, 06:04 PM
Last Post: Matt Agajanian
  A folding case for the 35s Chris C 10 1,638 11-04-2012, 07:24 AM
Last Post: Luiz C. Vieira (Brazil)
  HP-35 Field Case? Michael Gasperi 1 592 02-25-2012, 02:57 PM
Last Post: aj04062

Forum Jump: