Has HP stopped making HP-49G?



#2

I was just on the HPShopping.com site, The HP-49G is no longer listed or even referenced. Only the 9G, 39G and 48GX is listed. In past, they would list the entire line even if they weren't being sold on the web stite. They would inform you to check with the dealers for pricing.


#3

Bill:

You beat me to it. I noticed this omission too. I wonder if it is not but an error, and they meant to have the 49G instead of the 48GX listed.

-Ernie


#4

There's a thread about it in comp.sys.hp48 titled "HP-49G Discontinued???"

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=es&lr=&ie=UTF-8&frame=right&th=310756ecef3d1afb&seekm=phe2vu0etjh0mgfrv0iouogk22f7a8m4kc%404ax.com#link1

#5

Does anyone have any new information on the HP 49G? It has been off the HP web site since about December 13. The main calculator page still says they have graphing calculators with "32K to 1.5Mb of memory" (I assume 1.5 Mb refers to the 49), but this could be a mistake.

I visited a dealer in Singapore last week and he had an HP 49G on the shelf. He told me that he was not aware that the 49G had been cancelled. Interesting ... he did not have any HP 48GX's and said that they were on back order and he did not know when he could get any new units. I noticed that Amazon.com does not have any stock of the 48 or 49. Both are listed but there is no option to order. You could order them from Amazon until recently.

The certainly feels like the end of HP calculators. The statements at HPCC give some hope that new RPN models are on the way.


#6

Stan,

If you are in Singapore, you can purchase from Mac-Net, they are the HP Calc distributor since 1999, their web site address is http://www.educalc.net/ (note: No, they are not related to the EduCalc in U.S.!). Current price for 48GX at S$260.00 and 49G at S$320.00.


#7

Thanks for the web address. I had not seen this site.

I am trying to decide if I should buy a 49G as a back-up in case my 49G gets lost / broken / etc… I don’t use my 49G on a daily basis due to its size, keyboard and display (all of which have been discussed here at length). I do, however, enjoy working with the 49 as a hobby. It has a lot more memory than the 48 and it is much faster (I also like the keyboard layout better than the 48). If HP isn’t going to make a replacement model, I would like to have a second one so I would not have to buy one used (like people are doing with 32’s) later. If they do come out with a new model (or the 49G isn’t cancelled and it shows up on HP’s web site next week!), I would consider it a waste of money to have another one sitting around. That is the dilemma.

#8

I would say that it is really gone. When the 9G and 9S first went up on the web page, the 49G was not shown in the list of graphing calculators, but a link to it did show up when you went to the 48GX page. Then, the page was modified so that the 49G came up under the list of graphing calculators, so I thought it was back. Now the page has changed again, and it does not show up anywhere I can find. It seems likely that they have been out of production for a while, and the stock has been depleted.

best regards, Don


#9

And good riddance, too. Too complicated software design, further marred by lousy mechanical design and appallingly bad documentation. The 48GX was already too far down that particular road; the 49 just added insult to injury.

The 41 was the sweet spot: an elegant design, from both a software and a mechanical perspective, backed up by quality documentation and support.

Not like the shockers the ghost of HP past has been producing in recent years.

--- Les


#10

Les:

My sentiments exactly! In latter years, HP engineers must have suffered from chronic expertosis and tertiary featuritis. Personally, I found even the 28C/S too complicated, but at least it included a detailed reference manual. As far as I am concerned, things went steadily downhill ever since, and the 49G was the worst offender.

Just my $.02.
-Ernie


#11

I really do not mind Hp selling a top of the line feature unit such as the Hp48g series. But I feel HP should also sell a pocket calc also (ie 42s with real serial I/O, customablitie (RAM) and lots of it).


#12

Oh, I don't greatly object to the 48GX (after all, I own one). However, I've come to the view it's (along with the 49G) a specialized device for a specialized market: the science/engineering student who doesn't have enough funds for a computer.

And in these days of relatively low-cost PDA's, low-cost desktop PC's and computer labs all over most campuses, I think that market has gone. Matlab and Mathematica can do it all, far better.

Once in the work-force, we all have a computer on our desks, and we use it for all the non-trivial stuff. To appeal, a calculator has to be much smaller than the 48/49, much simpler and faster to use - something you can grab during a meeting to rough out some numbers.

I really don't see the 49 as being the "top of the line", in the sense that more features is better. To me, the sheer complexity of the 48/49 is an obstacle to use. I don't use it enough to even remember which of the shift keys to use to store into a variable on the menu line. Perhaps that's because I mostly reach for the 16C or 41CX for my day-to-day needs. Perhaps if the 48GX was the only calculator I had, I would be forced to become more familiar with it, and the pain would be less. . .

But I suspect that many high-tech companies need to learn an important lesson: more is not necessarily better. Often, simpler, more elegant and smaller are more appropriate.

Best,

--- Les


#13

I think you are right on about the complexity being an obstacle to use. A few years ago I made a remark in a post that I felt the 48SX (current at the time) may have made some of the hard stuff easier, but it made the easy stuff harder! Several people tried to straighten me out and convince me that I had just not spent the proper time to learn this powerful new tool. Maybe they are right, but I still reach for my 42S, not the 48, when I am off to a meeting. Sounds like at least some others feel the same.

#14

Les Bell wrote: >>>And in these days of relatively low-cost PDA's, low-cost desktop PC's and computer labs all over most campuses, I think that
market has gone. Matlab and Mathematica can do it all, far better.<<<

I agree with Les's opinion. Just would like to add Derive to the list of math software that deserves to be mentioned here. Derive is very easy to use, comes on a single floppy and capable of doing anything I need in maths (from numerical to close form calculations). I was even considering to find a TI92, as it has a built in Derive... (my apologies to all for expressing such a heresy at this Forum :-)


#15

Add Giac/Xcas to your list:
http://www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/~parisse/giac.html

It is free (GPL License) and it runs in several platforms:
- Linux x86 PC
- MS Windows PC
- StrongARM Linux devices (HP iPAQ i.e.)

And its author is Prof. Bernard Parisse, same one, that created Erable (hp48's CAS, and hp49's CAS).

Regards,
J.Manrique
#1077 HPCC Member

#16

I'll board the bus for part of the ride. IMHO, the 48 was the high-water mark. Sure, you only got half a manual, the AUR was on no sense "optional" if you wanted to do serious programming. And nobody but nobody would be using all of the features of even the S's, let alone the equation library _etc._ of the G's (so featuritis certainly fits).

But the HP quality was still there, power up the kazoo, memory to burn (well, in the G+ & GX anyway), IR .AND. wire connection, and that wonderful RPL.

But I don't (didn't) like the 49G either, that was where I drew the line. Now if they could only squeeze the 48's RPL into a Pioneer case....

#17

I think the 48GX is more user friendly than the 48SX. With the SX, I stuffed a 41CV Emulator ROM card into it and used it as a super-duper 41. (Though, I did use the SX for producing graphs to paste into lab notebooks, before GraphPad Prism. I even programmed the SX to plot dotted lines for enzyme inhibition assays. Also, the Chemistry ROM card, which utilizes the symbolic powers of the 48, is great for bench calculations, e.g. dilutions, molecular weights, etc.)

The most user friendly recent HP that I’ve used is the 27S (even received the manual months later, but had already figured it out). If only they had produced a 27Sii with RPN (a la 17Bii).

#18

I have to agree. I bought a 49G when they first came out - it has spent most of it's time in my desk drawer. I've tried to use it but it never felt comfortable. It's interesting that they dropped the 49G and kept the 48GX. They must have been selling a lot more 48GX than 49G.

I like playing around with the 48GX and the 28S, BUT I LOVE
USING the HP-41CX and the HP-11C. Whenever anyone asks why I like these older HP's, I just have them press the keys. The key action speaks for itself.


#19

Bill:

>Whenever anyone asks why I like these older HP's, I just have them press the keys. The key action speaks for itself.

Right on! The keyboard is a key element (pardon the pun) in a calculator, so it should have as good a quality as possible. The 41CX had an excellent keyboard, while the 48GX didn't, and the 49G most certainly did not.

Besides quality, I also consider the user interface important. This is a very gray area, however. In general, the simpler the interface, the easier the machine is to use. At one extreme we have the venerable HP-35 (simplicity itself), in which each key had one use and no surprises, while at the other end there's the 49G, with a horribly cluttered keyboard and more menus than the HP-45 had functions.

In my opinion, the 41CX contains a happy midpoint between simplicity and complexity of user interfaces, although I'm not quite head-over-heels about having to spell out function names (as in XEQ ALPHA ... ALPHA).

Still, if I had to choose one calculator available today, I'd go for the 48GX. The least of all evils! 8^)

-Ernie


#20

I agree. I eagerly awaited my hp49, and was excited when it came (I was upgrading from a hp15c). I never owned an hp48, so I was really unfamiliar with the layout, and the manual sucked!! I guess they assumed that you had "mastered" the hp48, so they weren't going to make a good manual for the 49.

Needless to say, I played with it for 10minutes, and have not used it since. I like my hp15C and 41CX :)


#21

David wrote: "I guess they assumed that you had "mastered" the hp48"

I think this is one of the keys... the 49 IS a 48+MetaKernel+Erable+Alg48+Stat48... Perhaps too many sources, too many authors for doing a well integrated system.
I've installed most of these programs in my 48, but they were installed when needed. And every program comes with its documentation I could learn to use the new features gradually... I guess I can use a 49G more efficiently, than if I were to learn that horrible 49's docs I have heard...
Raul

#22

I am not using HP calculators produced after the 41 since I consider
RPL to be too cumbersome for the available screen real estate.
Trying to scroll around the display to see the program, is less
convenient than the single line 41. With the 41 you just know that
you need a sheet of paper, with the 48, you still need the sheet
of paper and you have to fight with the screen editor.

My rule of thumb is that if you have to scroll the display (esp.
horizontally), you are doing something wrong. E.g. take the 71b:
long lines are a total pain on that one. Another example: Am I
writing this in Dave's little window in the Forum Web page? No, I
am using a real editor in a real window. I'll paste this back when
I finish.

Finally, I question the intuitiveness of the unbounded stack and
the strictly postfix command structure. I think they needlessly
complicated both the user and programming interface. I think Wilkes
got a little too clever on that one.

Although I have a 48SX and a 48GX (and I did own an HP 28C), I have
always preferred my 41C.

The software complexity was always a bit ahead of the hardware
capabilities. Notice the cluttered layout of the HP 67 and even the
HP 97. The 41 was an improvement in the sence that the complexity
of the calculator could be hidden from the user via function key
definitions and overlays. But it was a really complex machine. The
flat function catalogs (CAT 0,1,2,...) were atrocious (at least the
CX two level catalogs fixed that). But you could see that simply
having more programs and registers was causing lots of headaches
(the synthetic movable curtain was ingenious). HP realized that the
son of the 41 would need a different system, but I think RPL suffered
from what Fred Brooks call the Second System Effect.

Now that I can afford to have lots of HP calculators, I tend to use
a 97 for its printer and superb keyboard, but I have 2 33Cs and one
34C spread around my work area for quick calculations. The LED
display and the quality of the construction make them superb tools
for everyday use.

As many people have already mentioned, if I really want to solve
an integral I'd go to a real computer.

The 42S was crippled by the lack of I/O (it was a missed opportunity
not to have a bidirectional I/R interface or serial interface like
the 48SX) and the lack of a real time clock. These failings make
it useless to me, although the larger screen is definitely an
improvement.

The form factor of the 42S is probably the largest that can reasonably
be used comfortably. I'd trade a row of keys for a larger 4+1 level
display, but that would be it. I also like the ability to have soft
key labels over the function keys, but I wouldn't want to trade the
LASTx display for this.

So my dream machine would be a 41CX with 48SX display and I/O, in
a 42S form factor.

#23

Many people like to compare HP-49G with TI-89. Actually, I've both. I rarely use HP-49G as it makes your fingers feel tried. In terms of display, user interface design and speed, TI-89 is also a clear winner. If you're not talking about programming, TI-89 just leaves HP-49G in the dust. These powerhouses are already packed with lots of functions and downloadable software. No programming is practically necessary.

How can HP accept the fact that HP-49G eventually loses to TI-89 of its archrival?

#24

I have to agree. I have an HP-29C and an HP-41C. I bought an HP-49 last year and was shocked with the poor quality of the calculator and the unbelievably bad manual. It reads like a bad translation from the Japanese original that you used to see years ago.

I returned the calculator after a few days.


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  WP-34S Overlay - making it a bit more permanent? Marcel Samek 1 1,085 07-05-2013, 09:02 PM
Last Post: htom trites jr
  Riemann's Zeta Function update (HP-28S, HP-48G/GX/G+, HP-49G/G+/50g) Gerson W. Barbosa 0 1,059 06-30-2013, 01:01 AM
Last Post: Gerson W. Barbosa
  hp 49g+ and 50g cases William L. Drylie 16 4,499 06-04-2013, 07:28 PM
Last Post: Iqbal
  How much would making a one-off calculator cost? KoenDV 17 4,798 06-03-2013, 05:35 AM
Last Post: Nick_S
  HP 49G emulator for android Olivier De Smet 8 2,279 09-11-2012, 02:12 PM
Last Post: Brian K
  HP 49G print format - Solved Olivier De Smet 0 933 09-08-2012, 11:03 AM
Last Post: Olivier De Smet
  Difference between new HP-49G+ and HP-50G x34 7 2,680 04-25-2012, 08:58 AM
Last Post: Software49g
  19BII replacement recommendations/decision making help needed Timo Labrenz 20 4,848 03-28-2012, 12:24 PM
Last Post: Timo Labrenz
  Making the wp-34s label glossy Jose Poyan 5 1,778 02-12-2012, 12:15 PM
Last Post: Walter B
  50G has stopped plotting? Glenn Becker 2 1,139 07-11-2011, 06:01 PM
Last Post: Chris Randle (UK)

Forum Jump: