HP-35S Sizing



#6

Hi all.

Ron Ross' post, #3 in the thread 'Professional Engineers' brings up a point I've been wondering about for a while.

Given that HP wanted to commemorate the 35th anniversary of the HP-35 with the release of the 35S and, since the 33S was both a pocket-sized calc and shared most of the ROM from the 35S, why wasn't the 35S given a pocket-sized form factor?


#7

The 35S is pocketable. It's the same width as the 35, thinner, and only about 1/2" longer (partly due to the 2-line display). The 35S will actually fit in a slightly smaller pocket that the 35.

Edited: 30 Aug 2013, 12:51 a.m.


#8

Thanks for the clarification. But, what's to the contention from the post I cited which states the 35S is not pocketable?


#9

I haven't got a 33s for comparison, but according to Wikipedia, the 35s is the same height, 1mm narrower,and 2mm thicker (at the thickest point behind the display) than the 33s. Very little in the difference.

With all handheld calculators there's a trade-off. If you want it to fit in a small pocket you have to put up with a cramped keyboard and small display. If you want it comfortable for the desktop, pocketability suffers. For me, the HP 35s is a very good compromise.

#10

Quote:
Thanks for the clarification. But, what's to the contention from the post I cited which states the 35S is not pocketable?

Fred mentioned above that the 35S is slightly thinner than the 35 with a similar footprint. Bill Hewlett required that the original 35 fit into his shirt pocket, therefore the 35S will also fit into a shirt pocket.


#11

Yes, that is the well-known and very well memorised Bill Hewlett pocket shirt requirement. I didn't realised the same requirement was expected for the 35S.

Thanks

#12

I Ron misspoke. The HP-35S is clearly pocketable.

Edited: 30 Aug 2013, 9:41 p.m.


Forum Jump: