old times



#18

With all that fuzz about the 33S, one may wish old times to come back again. I was waiting for my domain name to become valid, to draw your attention to [link http://80.100.102.77/bram/hp]my HP site[/link], but let me wait no longer.

Although it is a simple, text-based site, I hope you'll enjoy at least some bits of it.

[img http://80.100.102.77/bram/hp/images/hp29c.gif]


#19

Tried to format my message. Seems that calcs are simpler to use than PCs....

#20

The New HP calculator company reminds me of when AMF started making Harley Davidson motorcycles. They said Harley Davidson, but ran like something else

delete 111

Edited: 18 May 2004, 7:25 p.m. after one or more responses were posted


#21

I remember Harley Davidson being owned by AMF (American Machine & Foundry). They also had their name on the bowling-pin equipment in the bowling alleys.

AMC (American Motors Corporation) made such famous cars as the Javelin, Matador, Gremlin, and of course, the Pacer. On the other hand, AMC did make Jeeps.

Matt
12345

#22

Your site brought back a fun memory. I spent a lot of time looking at the HP21 in the student store at NC State University in 1976 and 1977, but I could not afford it. In the summer break of 1977 I had a job working as an intern for a power company, and I earned enough to order the new HP29C. Soon after I ordered, I was asked to work the "night watch" schedule for a few days. My new 29C arrived just as I was leaving for an evening sitting at the watch desk, so I had a full evening of being paid to do nothing but sit and learn this new toy. After years of use, it was stolen from my desk at work in 1986. Although I could buy just about any calculator or computer I wanted today, nothing could match the feeling of that summer evening in 1977. I would pay well to have it back. Don 1234

#23

I took the liberty of adding a couple of colons.....


With all that fuzz about the 33S, one may wish old times to come back again. I was waiting for my domain name to become valid, to draw your attention to my HP site, but let me wait no longer.


Although it is a simple, text-based site, I hope you'll enjoy at least some bits of it.


#24

Thank you, Jeff.
That's how it should have been.

(I posted the message with Opera. The [nl] tags went well, but the others didn't (?))

#25

Thanks for the link to my site. In another week or two I should have it moved to a server where I won't need the non standard port. I have added some content, such as why the landscape layout is better than portrait. If you think portrait is better and want to keep thinking that way I suggest you do NOT read and try the method I describe for using the landscape layout calculators. Feel free to suggest changes or additions to the site.

Bring Back the 15C


#26

I like your site! Old Times! I just cleared the entire memory of my 15C. Transfered all the astronomy programs, (which used almost all of its memory), to the new 33s which seems to work ok. Now I can go back to one of the best calcs ever made, get out the old Advanced Functions Handbook, and have some good fun!

tm


#27

I want to talk (preferably meet) with anyone who love hp calculators and astronomy programs!

Art Litka


#28

Welcome to Finland!

[VPN]

#29

The landscape view, particularly if the viewing area is sufficiently long, is preferable for a modern algebraic calculator. It simply allows for a longer expression.

As for finger placement, I don't find one preferable to the other, i.e., landscape vs. portrait.

I regularly switch between my only landscape model, the 15C, and my other non-landscape RPN models. I once owned a 71B as well.

As for a 15C without the contemporary features of the 32/33, forget it. I believe a new model should incorporate fraction capability, better accuracy, 3 digit exponents, etc. HP should INVENT a better 15C, although, hopefully, NOT the way they invented a better 32SII.

1234 to delete


#30

Quote:
As for a 15C without the contemporary features of the 32/33, forget it. I believe a new model should incorporate fraction capability, better accuracy, 3 digit exponents, etc. HP should INVENT a better 15C, although, hopefully, NOT the way they invented a better 32SII.

My advocacy of the HP 15C is for use as an everyday real world use calculator. NOT as a calculator for college or high school students. I guess it is possible that there are applications where you need to use numbers that have more than 100 digits or 10 digit precision, but I am at a loss as to think of any. In fact when theory and design are taken from the drawing board to real life you are hard pressed to get even 5 digit precision in a manufactured item. 1.0 E99 is large enough to calculate the volume of 100 trillion, trillion, trillion, trillions of planets the size of earth in cubic millimeters. If I did find myself needing numbers like that I would be using a desktop computer not a calculator. Out side of math class I have never seen much need for fractions on my calculator. As far as your ability to be equally comfortable using both portrait and landscape calculators, I didn't mean to imply that portrait couldn't be used comfortably, just that the landscape layout is more efficient if you know how to hold it properly.

The most common request for change from people who signed the petition is more memory and faster processor. Only a few have requested that.

Chris W

Bring Back The

The petition


Not getting the gifts you want? The Wish Zone can help!


#31

I am all for any minor improvements and fraction support is actually quite useful to many (not me either). Where you may ask? Why any archetect, builder or carpenter and if you add them up, you may get even more advacates for your 15c. A feature that can be implemented w/o cost should be considered.

Actually you should also consider an algebraic option (with precidence and parenthasis) to widen your market while not closing any doors. Hp is very bad at this. Almost every upgrade Hp ever introduces may or may not be two steps forward, but they ALWAYS take one step back.

A few classic examples:

Hp11c- Hp32s
Hp15c- Hp42s

Both were big steps forward, but both replacements are actually somewhat bigger (longer) and don't travel nearly as well.

Hp32s - Hp33s

Bigger Again. Lost the nice enter key (earlier post, this is probably inevitable). Did not bother to replace the 42s and therefore an actually superior product has never been replaced.

Lest I praise the 42s too much, it could have been a nice substitute for the ageing 41c line. Sadly, without I/O, it cannot.

41c - 48G

Nice upgrade, much better in nearly all areas, BUT the typical Hp41c customer DIDn't want a oversized Graphics for the features they acquired. Yes Graphics took over or created a market, but the portable pocket calculator market is left void of any real product.

That is why I always crusade for a small portable calculator such as the 15c (I like its size best) or a 42s style calculator that can be expanded much like the 41c series.

Hp made a low end Hp20s for 15 years for $30. They have made the Hp12c for over two decades (many people would buy an hp15c off the same line). Why not.


#32

Quote:
Hp15c- Hp42s

...big steps forward, but...


...the 42s is the ugliest calc I have. Isn't it?

#33

I want to support Chris's view. In real life I need a small and reliable calculator, capable to do precise calculations with just a few clicks (no complicated menus to go through). My Background:

I owned a repaired HP 25C as my first real scientific calculator in the late seventies and early eighties. It took me almost to my Ph.D. in nuclear physics, and the only feature I was really missing at that time was linear regression. When I missed it to much, I bought an HP 11C, which had everything I wanted then for a reasonable price. Sadly, this item got lost some years later. Then, since HP 11C was not available anymore, I switched to an HP 32S and was quite happy with it. It was bigger in size, but I could not get anything smaller with RPN - and to read my programs turned out to be a lot easier.

Now I own an HP 48SX, HP 42S and HP 15C, too, and managed to get again an HP 25C and HP 11C. Looking at all these and summing up, my results are:

- HP 48SX is to big and complicated for using it. I certainly would have graded it differently, if I still would have to do complicated mathematical calculations everyday. But even then it is really to big to carry it everywhere. In my opinion, this holds for the newer models, too (HP 48G, HP49 etc.). No more pocket calculators.

- HP 42S is very nice (2 lines display, readable programs, lots of useful functions, covers almost everything). For me, however, the menu (or catalog) way of accessing functions is somewhat indirect. I prefer the blue and gold buttons instead. And the pioneers are a bit bigger than shirt pocket size. And, so far, I was not able to adjust display contrast of my HP 42S the way it comes as bright as in my HP 11C or HP 32S.

- HP 15C has everything necessary in a nice and small and reliable package. According to my experience, it contains all the scientific and technical math I needed in science studies at university and in professional life (and for more exotic applications I can program it). With a modernized user interface (high contrast dot matrix display, alphanumerical messages, readable programs instead of button codes, more memory, maybe (!) 6 stack levels) it would cover almost every wish I can think of for a real pocket device. For more, I would turn to a notebook or PC today. Or I will take a pencil and a sheet of paper ...

- Earlier models (LED) are still nice to look at (I've collected some of them), but their performance is outdated.

A modernized HP 15C as sketched above will find a market, taking into account all the people needing some bigger amount of math and being able to control it, appreciating good design and reliable quality. It could be THE scientific pocket calculator.

Nevertheless, this only my personal view. Good luck!

Edited: 21 May 2004, 8:36 a.m.


#34

You can take a look on the OpenRPN project.

Best regards,

Nelson


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  setting up subroutines that are called many times... Geoff Quickfall 4 412 10-18-2013, 03:41 AM
Last Post: Geoff Quickfall
  Los Angeles Times on the HP-12C Peter Murphy (Livermore) 6 471 08-29-2013, 02:18 PM
Last Post: Matt Agajanian
  Meg Whitman's Toughest Campaign (New York Times) Eric Smith 1 189 09-30-2012, 08:38 AM
Last Post: Jim Johnson
  NY Times article - a school without "technology" Don Shepherd 26 1,301 10-26-2011, 01:33 PM
Last Post: Dominic Richens
  HP12C Article in the Financial Times Charles 4 332 09-24-2011, 06:54 PM
Last Post: Mark Harman
  33S times off in 4 seconds designnut 4 304 09-18-2011, 12:55 PM
Last Post: Frank Rottgardt
  LA TIMES HP ARTICLE Howard Lazerson 3 305 08-28-2011, 05:44 PM
Last Post: Howard Owen
  Times have changed Nick R 3 283 08-27-2011, 02:47 AM
Last Post: Thomas Radtke
  Charging times for HP-41 rebuilt battery pack Timo 2 251 01-07-2011, 11:31 AM
Last Post: Timo
  HP / Mark Hurd in New York Times today... . .... Thomas Chrapkiewicz 0 142 04-26-2009, 09:36 AM
Last Post: Thomas Chrapkiewicz

Forum Jump: