[43S] For your weekend pleasure



#89

FYI, what came out of that kickoff in November and some opinion polls in December so far:

The shifted functions of f and g are shown for clarity only – they will not be printed.

Enjoy,

d:-)


#90


#91

Yeah, I know that breed :-) Also made them myself years ago:

d:-)

#92

I'm sure most people prefer the ALPHA mode key in an unshifted position.


#93

That's an unproven claim. But if YOU prefer it unshifted, just suggest what to remove to a shifted position instead.


#94

Quote:
That's an unproven claim. But if YOU prefer it unshifted, just suggest what to remove to a shifted position instead.

USER.

Or any of the functions in the two top rows.

Your linked thread already contains several posts related to unshifted Alpha and other ideas about keyboard assignment.


#95

Quote:
USER.
Or any of the functions in the two top rows.

Thanks, counted :-)
Quote:
Your linked thread already contains several posts related to unshifted Alpha and other ideas about keyboard assignment.

New game, new luck - there were several threads in between.

d:-)

#96

I'm not impressed with the top two rows, and the shifted alpha is a show stopper.

No pleasure on my part. I'll give this one a miss.

Edited: 27 Jan 2013, 9:53 a.m. after one or more responses were posted


#97

Quote:
I'm not impressed with the top row, and the shifted alpha is a show stopper.

Thanks for your opinion. As previous polls showed, personal mileages vary significantly in this matter ([;-)
And as you know, the keyboard will be fully user-assignable in USER mode, so you can get your unshifted alpha - wherever you like placing it.

d:-)


#98

I know. But the whole thing dosn't look good - the top two rows especially - too cluttered to my taste. I'm not going to vote or suggest any particular changes, I simply dislike this version/concept as a whole.

Regards,


#99

No problem - we can't please everybody as much as with the WP 34S ;-)

I have to chuckle, because my first impression of the first two rows was, "Nice! The algebra and trig functions are really easy to find!" That's what I use the most, so they are most important to me. We're all different, Walter!


Quote:
"Nice! The algebra and trig functions are really easy to find!"
How hard it will be to hit TRIG?


Quote:
That's what I use the most, so they are most important to me.
Yea, it's all about you. How many of them calcs are you going to buy? 1 or 2?

Hey, Reth, that's unfair! The other picture wasn't posted yet when Jeff wrote his post.

d>:-I


ok I stand corrected about my first note.

The second one stands though and is more important. Plenty of examples in this and previous threads.

Why do people condem a shifted alpha without any idea as to how this key will be used? Do folks really create lots of alpha strings while doing calculations? Personally, I don't -- I calculate with numbers.

The proposal isn't a 41 series -- you won't need alpha to access functions. Alpha exists for program prompts and program/variable names and once defined these will be in a menu.


- Pauli


I often key in command names rather than searching for them in menus or catalogs. I also use shortcut menus for frequently used functions. Maybe it's not necessary to key in function names, but will it be possible at all?


Please allow me to quote the (admittedly very preliminary) documentation:

Quote:

The CATALOG contains – among others – the complete function and (sub-) menu sets provided, sorted alphabetically. Opening CATALOG will display its top level branches (...). Choosing a branch will show its first 18 items – primary, f- and g-shifted if applicable – and set alpha mode. Navigating in CATALOG may use the alphabetic searching method as described for WP 34S catalogs, but the matching item will be displayed together with its two predecessors and up to 15 successors if applicable, and selecting an item is by pressing the corresponding softkey (headed by a prefix if applicable). [v] will advance by six items (and [^] go back by six). [EXIT] will just leave the catalog.


d:-)

It would also be possible for USER to initiate alpha mode while command argument entry is being prompted for. XEQ USER ... e.g.

Saves the shift key press in this case which only leaves prompts in programs or entering alpha data.


- Pauli

An incremental search in the CAT will be nice, if it doesn't have key press reaction lags, of course. But will the machine have a real command line, like the HP 48 ?


Quote:
But will the machine have a real command line, like the HP 48 ?

Please explain what "a real command line" means for you - I've some 48's here but don't use them regularily - far too bulky and repellent IMO.

d:-)


A command line is what the name implies. You simply key something in, press ENTER, and the expected command will be invoked. Please take a look into the HP 48 docs for details. The HP-28 or HP-71B manuals may do, too.

Therefore the question about a command line.

Will there be a real command line, or will the entry generally be restricted by the CAT tree frame or predefined menus?

How will entry be in program mode? Will the same leaded entry be active, or will the user have the ability to enter free text, which is then interpreted by a parser into program lines or code slices?

You wrote in msg #18 the doc is very preliminary: Are the entry modes and options, and the programming model already defined?


Quote:
You simply key something in, press ENTER, and the expected command will be invoked.

I didn't know any calculator is able to do that ;-)

Seriously, you can (in the future) go into CATALOG, choose FCN, and start keying in. The first item matching will be displayed with its environment (-2 ... +15). Key in one character more and the display will change accordingly. When "your" FCN is under the 18 displayed, press the respective softkey.

All that's just wishful thinking so far. But we'll definitly have a calculator lacking built-in clairvoyance.

d:-)

Hi Walter,

Do you have notional lists of the functions under each of the menus? Also, will the up-arrow and down-arrow keys work to advance through the groups of six soft keys like the 42S? I always thought that was far superior to sacrificing key positions like "next"/"prev" on the graphers or the "MORE" soft key on the financial machines. For what it is worth, I also felt that the LCD annunciator in the 42S which turned on to remind the user that more "pages" of soft keys were available was a brilliant idea.

Thanks,
Jake


Hi Jake,

Quote:
Do you have notional lists of the functions under each of the menus?
Yes.
Quote:
Also, will the up-arrow and down-arrow keys work to advance through the groups of six soft keys like the 42S?
Almost - they will advance by eighteen.
Quote:
... I also felt that the LCD annunciator in the 42S which turned on to remind the user that more "pages" of soft keys were available was a brilliant idea.

Annunciator-wise, the world is wide open now. So yes.

d:-)

Silly question...

Why don't any HP calculators allow for "double shifted" keys? This doesn't even seem to occur with the WP34S.

I would think that double-shifted keys would add a lot of potential value, at the possible expense of a more complex label. Alternatively, they could also be treated as USER-style keys where the label doesn't appear, but is remembered by the cognoscenti, or actual USER keys.

In the calculator proposal at hand, an f-g shift would increase the keyboardable commands 33%. In the WP34S, with an f-g-h there would be three double shifts and one triple shift available, either increasing the number of keyboardable commands 75% or 100%.

If we got even fancier (read: more complex) and used permutations of the two shifts instead of combinations, the possibilities increase even further. How much further? Get your HP and figure it out! :) (Or do it in your head with such small numbers...)

(Okay, now, onto ad absurdum...) Heck, we could make each shift a multi-state shift as well, so you could have f-keys, and ff-keys, g-keys and gg-keys, fg-keys, ffg-keys, ffgg-keys, etc. However, perhaps the simplest would be just doubled shift keys.

As an example:

(Replace gg-KEY with fg-KEY depending if you like doubled-shifts or combination of shifts. I'll leave the ff-key to the user's imagination if doubled shifts are used.)

Y^X = y^x

f-Y^X = x root of y

g-Y^X = x^2

gg-Y^X = sqrt

LN = ln x

f-LN = e^x

g-LN = log x

gg-LN = 10^x

SIN = sin x

f-SIN = arcsin x

g-SIN = sinh x

gg-SIN = arcsinh x

GTO = GTO
f-GTO = LBL
g-GTO = RTN
gg-GTO = END (or whatever...)

And so forth. It would allow many logical groupings of closely related functions on one key.

Now, I realize that there may be software/firmware reasons not to do this; ROM (well, flash) space is limited, but the space for an additional keyboard map (or several) is too great. The information design challenge is formidable, but possibly fun.

Any thoughts?

Cheers,

Doug

PS: What about scrapping the overlay entirely and just putting a 200+ PPI display behind the keys... :)





Edited: 27 Jan 2013, 12:40 p.m.


Quote:
Why don't any HP calculators allow for "double shifted" keys? This doesn't even seem to occur with the WP34S. ...
The information design challenge is formidable, but possibly fun.

Any thoughts?


Hmmh, if HP didn't feature it so far and we don't feature it ... there may be (maybe!) reasons. I don't know about HP's but ours were simple:
  • We read quite some complaints about non-registering and double-registering keys before we started our design :-(
  • We get older every day. Some of us may get Parkinson, you know ... :-(
  • We want to keep the UI simple :-)
And for the formidable design challenge, I wish you lots of fun ;-)
Quote:
What about scrapping the overlay entirely and just putting a 200+ PPI display behind the keys... :)

Most willingly when you pay for it and the corresponding keyboard mechanics :-)

Edited: 27 Jan 2013, 12:57 p.m.


Given the unfortunate amount of money I spend on Apple products for a family of 5, and a recent penchant for old HP calculators, I'd probably be willing to pay as much as a top of the line iPad for a truly powerful, highly ergonomic and very flexible (read: open, reprogrammable) HP-style calculator.

If there were a kickstarter for such a thing, I'd probably back to the tune of high three figures or the minimum four figures.

Unfortunately, I just don't think there are enough people like me, willing to have the best and pay for it (and able to pay for it) too. My kids aren't in college yet so I can afford to be a little looser with my discretionary spending, though.

I wouldn't mind contributing to the programming of the project. Now that I have a WP34S programming cable and a few spare 20s and 30s, I will be trying that out in the coming weeks as my time permits.

That said... Perhaps in time we as a group could figure out how to source the hardware. The DMCC folks did it to a small scale, and Monte made three production runs of (as far as I can tell) completely computer-built CL motherboards, and Harald put together a neat USB daughtercard, so perhaps we will come up with a generic yet powerful calculator hardware that could then be purposed however we like. (Complete with overlay templates with CAD files to allow them to be printed on automated cutters.)

Alas, I know next to nothing about hardware and producing physical devices, so for all I know I'm talking out of my rear. :( It just doesn't feel that it should be that hard to make an HP 30b or 42S sized calculator (perhaps with an extra row of buttons) with a good dot matrix LCD (more finely pitched than the 42S and perhaps with height for 3 rows + annunciators) with a generic yet powerful CPU (ARM, likely), a few megabytes of flash, a few megabytes of RAM, a USB port, an IR port, and a micro SD card. (Maybe even Bluetooth 4.0 low power.) Monte, however, did indicate that the software support of those things like Bluetooth and SD cards may be harder than hardware support, in an e-mail to me, although that might have been restricted to the capabilities of the NEWT rather than in general.

Cheers,

Doug


PS: I also want the full Mathematica kernel on my iPad, though. :) Really, there's no reason it can't be done, given that Mathematica ran on lesser computers ages ago. I spoke with a Wolfram engineer about it a year or two ago at GenCon.


Doug,

You are not alone claiming that it can't be difficult ...

Quote:
... to make an HP 30b or 42S sized calculator (perhaps with an extra row of buttons) with a good dot matrix LCD (more finely pitched than the 42S and perhaps with height for 3 rows + annunciators) with a generic yet powerful CPU (ARM, likely), a few megabytes of flash, a few megabytes of RAM, a USB port, an IR port, and a micro SD card.

Other visitors (I don't remember their number) have made similar claims in the last ten years. Up to now, the only ones I've seen really *making* it are Monte (for the 41CL) and us (for the WP 34S). Don't get me wrong - I wish you all the best - but I cannot hide my scepticism when reading just another such claim again. I'll turn into a believer, however, as soon as you really show up with a working calculator (it doesn't have to be free of bugs - that will become a community effort then).

FYI, please note that Eric Smith and Richard Ottosen are working on a hardware featuring what we (Pauli and I) are confident will carry us pretty close to a superb pocket calculator - this actually is going to be the HW base of the 43S project. They do so for quite a while so you can guess it's not as easy as many people think.

I recommend searching the archives as a first step in your quest for a state-of-the-art pocket calculator - just to get an idea.

d:-)


Quote:
Doug,

You are not alone claiming that it can't be difficult ...


I do admit that I know nothing about hardware design, though! So, it doesn't seem like it should be difficult to me, but I have no knowledge of the factors that would actually make it difficult. I just have a general engineering sense and a lot of experience with software. So, I'm not claiming it can't be difficult, I'm claiming it seems to me that it wouldn't be difficult, if you had the necessary domain knowledge. And, I'm also claiming ignorance so someone more knowledgable can put me in my place. :)

Cheers,

Doug

Hi,

I might have missed something when the last round of keyboard arrangements were circulating, but why are there no gold-shifted functions on the number keys?

Thanks,
Jake


Hi Jake,

Quote:
why are there no gold-shifted functions on the number keys?

The only real reason is we didn't need the space and found it looking better :-) But you are free to assign whatever you like to these locations - it will become effective in USER mode.

d:-)

Quote:
I'd probably be willing to pay as much as a top of the line iPad for a truly powerful, highly ergonomic and very flexible (read: open, reprogrammable) HP-style calculator.

The 30b satisfies most of these -- with the 34S firmware it is open and reprogrammable. The display is its primary weak point followed by RAM.

- Pauli


Hi there,

I have a WP34S pre-made from hpcalc.org (to support them), indeed, and several 20b/30bs and a cable from Gene. I plan to be playing in the source code soon. :)

I'd still like a better display and another row of buttons... Plus more I/O (as previously mentioned).

Cheers,

Doug


The 30b hardware has quite a bit of internally exposed functionality that is left unused. SPI, GPIO and some A/D pins and likely others I'm not remembering.


- Pauli


Hi Paul. I also just received a pre-made 34s and a cable from Gene.

My 34s came with build 3311 which I understand is the current official release. Where can I find newer releases?

Regards,

John


http://sourceforge.net/projects/wp34s/

- Pauli


... then click on 'Code', select directory 'trunk', then 'realbuild'. Voilà!

d:-)


Thank you W&P.


John

I use double shifting in the SandMath, PowerCl, 41Z... it's the most natural way to extend the user interface in a natural and intuitive manner. Function launchers linked to related menues... a breeze once you overcome the initial reticences. Every instance of SHIFT has a visual cue in the display - and it's well know the 41 keyboard doesn't miss any pressing, a perfect compromise.

Good to see this still going forward!

Some thoughts / questions:

1) Primary function for 10^x or e^x vs. the logs

- Which does the group think is used more often? I know HP went back and forth on which was primary. What *should* be primary?

2) f alpha doesn't seem like that big a deal to me, since they are right next to each other. It's convenient enough, IMO.

3) ->HR as a primary function is still humorous to me. Is it really used that often? :-)

4) As I seem to recall, prefix keys were not an option here, aka HYP SIN as on two keys? If they were, I would still like the look of a HYP and HYP-1 key up there.

Yes, I know it is all reassignable. Keep up the hard work!


Quote:
3) ->HR as a primary function is still humorous to me. Is it really used that often? :-)

That was one result of a poll in December. Ask e.g. Geoff :-)

And there were very few fans of hyperbolics, IIRC.

d:-)


I for one really, really like the proposal. Like Gene, I'm glad to see this still moving forward and would echo a couple of his comments.

First, the logarithms versus anti-log primary placement. I agree that y^x is a great primary. This leads logically 10^x and e^x as primaries. However, I expect the logs are used more than the anti-logs, which makes this unfortunate. 10^x, particularly, seems a waste of a primary since it's so easy to do this with y^x. I'd suggest not getting too hung up on symmetry across these three keys, instead making LN and LG primary and their inverses yellow-shifted.

Log(x)y is also something that could be done quickly with ln(x) or lg(x), but I'd respect the computer (or other) types weighing in on the need to calculate logs in different bases with fewer keystrokes. Is such a need worth asking about? Absent such an expressed desire, the yellow-shifted function of y^x could be used for HYP. Depending on how the inverse trig functions are implemented for the hyperbolics, there wouldn't need to be a HYP^-1 key. (I will admit that I haven't used a hyperbolic function since college but, similar to Gene, "I like the look".)

Even if none of these were incorporated, I'd use a calculator with this layout all day long.

-Bill


Quote:
I agree that y^x is a great primary. This leads logically 10^x and e^x as primaries. However, I expect the logs are used more than the anti-logs, which makes this unfortunate. 10^x, particularly, seems a waste of a primary since it's so easy to do this with y^x. I'd suggest not getting too hung up on symmetry across these three keys, instead making LN and LG primary and their inverses yellow-shifted.

Being a physicist, I admit I love symmetry :-) Nevertheless I share your view about 10^x. I've to think about a design where HYP may be in and 10^x out - and still looking good.

d:-/


The EEs (and anybody else who worries about decibels) will want both 10^x and base 10 logs readily available.


Quote:
The EEs (and anybody else who worries about decibels) will want both 10^x and base 10 logs readily available.

OK, OK, maybe all this is just too complicated. How about this:

(two menus instead - the left being TRIG, the right being LOG)?

d:-)


THAT I like! Brilliant!

P.S. We all agree that we are different in terms of which functions we use most of the time. Given the fact that now we will have menus I find quite selfish everyone to insist having their favourites as primaries on the keyboard. Not only the calculator looks heaps better now, but it's much more functional. One keystroke and you have all TRIGS or LOGS. Leave the top row free for the menus and everyone's happy. For example in my profession I have no usage for LOGS or Complex numbers at all. So I'd assign something I find useful on LOGS menu key and there you go.


Edited: 29 Jan 2013, 12:45 a.m.


Quote:
THAT I like! Brilliant!

Me too! :-)

Franz


I think I've to highlight today ;-)


Quote:
I think I've to highlight today ;-)

I don't quite understand, why? Because I agree with your layout?

Well, IIRC it was me who first suggested these 'TRIG' and 'LOG' menus. ;-)

Franz

Where is y^x now? :-(


Quote:
Where is y^x now? :-(

[LOG][F6]

Edited: 29 Jan 2013, 8:06 a.m.

Gene,

An alternative could look like this:

with a key not really necessary, but looking right ;-)

d:-)


Quote:
An alternative could look like this:

The more often I see this the more I dislike it!

Labeling dedicated function keys with anything else than F1..F6 is ............ just ugly. :-(

Franz


I know your opinion in this matter. The HP-42S is just ugly.

d:-/

Edited: 29 Jan 2013, 10:24 a.m.


Quote:
The HP-42S is just ugly.

Not comparable - the 42S has one row less!

And BTW, I didn't know that you want to make a 42S clone!? ;-)

Franz

Edited: 29 Jan 2013, 10:36 a.m.


Quote:

Not comparable - the 42S has one row less!


For your basic information: Almost everything is comparable.
Quote:
And BTW, I didn't know that you want to make a 42S clone!?

Who spoke about a clone?

d:-)

I like this, Walter.

Let's face it... this calculator will appeal (primarily, I assume) to those who are already highly interested in high end, non graphical calculators. I don't imagine those individuals will be confused by this arrangement of the top two rows of keys OR what the arrows mean.

Convenience.

Lots of functions on the keyboard (yay!) and menu labels too.

My 2 cents, but I expect to pay more than that for one of these. :-)

HYP SIN of course.

What about HYP f ASIN for inverse hyp sine rather than f HYP-1 SIN ?

After all, the inverse trig are already there. Saves a key location.


Gene

Your space saving effort is appreciated. This project, however, differs from others (e.g. the WP 34S) since we actually have sufficient locations for whatever labels are necessary so far. Menus and softkeys give a lot of space for breathing. The challenge is achieving an overall 'simple' UI, although a lot of power will be in. So what shall be printed on f-shifted HYP instead? I admit I don't know anything nicer than HYP^-1 at that location yet.

And - yes - also the F1 ... F6 row looks beautiful in my eyes.

d:-/


Quote:

And - yes - also the F1 ... F6 row looks beautiful in my eyes.

d:-/


It does look beautiful because it is.
You should think about personalized versions. 3 or 4 close to retirement fans max. On special price, say $2,000 at least.

Quote:

It does look beautiful because it is.
You should think about personalized versions. 3 or 4 close to retirement fans max. On special price, say $2,000 at least.


:-D Are here any persons who do not qualify for that?

d:-)

I'd point out that having HYP and/or HYP-1 goes against having a simple UI. It acts as an extra prefix key which introduces unnecessary complexity both to the underlying keyboard handling code, the documentation and the the user interface.


- Pauli


Quote:
I'd point out that having HYP and/or HYP-1 goes against having a simple UI. It acts as an extra prefix key which introduces unnecessary complexity both to the underlying keyboard handling code, the documentation and the the user interface.

OK, there they go - HYP and HYP-1 tumbling to the ground. I'll think about a better offer.

d:-)


Since we cannot have any HYP key, how about this:

BTW, I thought we once had a poll about the top row of keys populated or not. But I can't find it :-( So if there really was none yet, I think I know the topic of the next to come ...

d:-)


Quote:
...how about this:...

That's a good one! H.MS+ unshifted :-) I'm going to order at least 2!

Max


I knew you'd like that.

d:-)


Dumb question and one I can't check right now or I would find out without potentially displaying my ignorance for the world to see!

Is HMS- the same as CHS HMS+ ?


Yes, Sir. Same as '-' being '+/- +', '/' being '1/x *', etc. Did I tell you we've got enough space?

d:-)

P.S.:

Quote:
Dumb question and one I can't check right now or I would find out without potentially displaying my ignorance for the world to see!

Interesting semantic design ;-)


Edited: 30 Jan 2013, 2:28 p.m.

Hey Paul!

Would having HYP really be that difficult? You will already have to deal with f and g... and you had a third on the 34S. ;-)

HYP sin and HYP f ASIN ?

Hey, if I don't ask...

Cheers.
Gene


I never said it would be difficult, I just noted that it would add complexity to various areas. I think it will be more than most people suspect.

I've never measured the full cost of having the HYP key on the 34S. It takes a bit of RAM, adds a special input mode and requires more than a few exceptions in the code. The single function for the keyboard input mode on the 34S takes 250 bytes of code. Then add in the display specials and half dozen or so extra checks required (and the code associated with them). I'd guess something approaching half a kilobyte of code just to support this feature.

- Pauli

Wouldn't the hyperbolic functions be more suited to the LOG menu? I guess they relate both ways but they are really logarithmic in nature.

I'd like extra trig functions: sec, cosec, cot and their inverses, possible versin, haversine, exsecant and freinds as well.

Also, the Jacobi elliptic functions which bridge between the trig functions at one end and the hyperbolics at the other.


- Pauli


As long as they are hidden in menus - no problem.

Leave the top row F1-F6 and you've got a winner.

Dave: I understand and agree that 10^x is useful. My point is that 10^x and e^x are used less than LG and LN, so the logarithms would me more appropriate (if less symmetric) primary keys.

Walter: Log(x)y is where I would put a HYP key (assuming there isn't a strong desire for the current logarithm, since HYP is definitely not a must-have).

P.S. I like the original proposal much, much better than the above revision.

-Bill

Edited: 28 Jan 2013, 4:19 p.m.


Some of us (or maybe just me?) use e^x and LN more than 10^x and LOG, so we'd rather have e^x and LN as unshifted, and 10^x and LOG as their shifts.

I like this one and have a question: What, specifically, is the reason why a shifted alpha undesirable? When alpha is invoked, does it work for only one character, or does it lock until alpha is pressed again? If the usual behaviour is to work for just one character, I can see the objection. Please enlighten me.


Alpha mode is going to be entered via f [alpha] and left via [ENTER] (maybe also via [EXIT] - I don't remember why I didn't allow for that right now). There will be no single character entry mode AFAICS.

d:-)


Adding the ability to exit by pressing [EXIT] would be a nicely obvious and welcome move.


I put it in. We'll see what happens - [EXIT] will have many functions.

d:-)


Indeed. It should be a catch-all for "get me out of this mode".

Walter; The only problem i see is that i use/used p<>r a lot, even when i have a program going. Since you have it assigned to a hot key it will be a drag to use. I guess one would have to get out of the user keyboard and then back into it. Unless there are a lot more people who use natural logs and e than i think, maybe you could switch the keys for them. If not; that's how i'd assign them so it's no big deal, assuming that all keys can be re-assigned. "On the griping hand" - i'll be ridiculously happy just to own one however the stock keyboard looks. - db


Maybe p<>r could be put on a shifted key that doesn't yet have something assigned to it.


could be. it seems cleanest to have p>r and r>p as shifted functions on adjoining keys or as the F & G functions on the same key.
edited because eric is right.


Edited: 30 Jan 2013, 7:26 p.m.

I don't see how "p<>r" makes any sense. It seems like you need "p->r" and "r->p".

I like it very much so far.

I know the keyboard pixel-perfect-layout is not important at this stage - but I was always wondering, why we have to underline the shifted keys which represent menus? For me the underlining somehow distracts the reading somehow. Why not make an inverse lettering? E.g. as in this image:


Hallo Michael,

das kann man natürlich auch machen - nur Word kann das nicht, soweit ich weiß, und darum ist das in der Entwurfsphase etwas ungeschickt. Und sobald es später dann mal an das große Individualisieren der Rechner und das Drucken von Overlays geht, wäre eine einfach erstellbare Schriftart auch vorzuziehen.

(Possible, but AFAIK not in MS Word - hence suboptimal.)

d:-)


Perfekt! Genau, in der Entwurfsphase muss man sich ja auch noch nicht um so etwas Gedanken machen ;-)

Freue mich, wenn der 43S etwas wird!

I'd suggest to go even further and omit the visual emphasizing of the blue shifted menu keys completely. There are only 4 blue shifted keys that are not menus. Right arrow, "OFF", "RTN", and "LBL". I believe that it shouldn't be to difficult for the educated user to understand that almost all of the blue shifted keys are menus, except for the four mentioned before. And those 4 keys are so nicely grouped :-)

Günter


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Trivial news of the 43S (no Prime) Walter B 117 7,522 11-22-2013, 03:26 AM
Last Post: Raymond Del Tondo
  What exactly is the WP 43S Harold A Climer 5 760 11-16-2013, 03:58 PM
Last Post: Jonathan Cameron
  Another wishlist for 43s Andrew Nikitin 3 539 07-14-2013, 09:25 PM
Last Post: Andrew Nikitin
  Some random wish list items for the 43s Marcel Samek 18 1,690 07-11-2013, 05:35 PM
Last Post: Paul Dale
  News from the 43S Walter B 78 4,228 07-08-2013, 10:33 AM
Last Post: Victor Koechli
  [43S] Display and top row, refined Walter B 20 1,615 04-24-2013, 01:36 AM
Last Post: Walter B
  [43S] Display Walter B 67 3,532 03-17-2013, 09:22 AM
Last Post: Walter B
  [43s] : How the solver will be implemented Miguel Toro 3 563 03-14-2013, 06:09 PM
Last Post: Walter B
  [43S] Display myth crasher Walter B 46 3,576 02-06-2013, 01:07 AM
Last Post: Walter B
  [43S]Top row poll (until Monday, 4.2.13, 13:13 UTC) Walter B 175 9,879 02-04-2013, 09:38 AM
Last Post: Andrés C. Rodríguez (Argentina)

Forum Jump: