Part 1:
Q) Why did HP redesign the calculator?
A) To make more money.
Q) Are there advantages to one or the other?
A) IMO, from all practical standpoints, no.
Q) Which is the better version to have?
A) It's a matter of personal taste in the LCD.
Q) Is one easier to repair than the other?
A) That would depend upon what was wrong.
Q) Does one have a greater failure rate than the other?
A) My money is on the Halfnut being more reliable.
Q) What is the difference in the guts and why the change?
A) You already asked about that. Money.
Q) Externally, what is the difference?
A) The appearance of the LCD.
Q) What are the problems with each type?
A) You already asked about that, didn't you?
Q) Is the change of absolutely no signficance what-so-ever?
A) All depends upon your point of view.
Part 2:
Anyway, you spoke of some hardware that you thought one needed to modify how the display appears ----
Q) is that hardware difficult to acquire?
A) Yes
Q) is it expensive?
A) Yes
Q) where would I get that kinda of hardware?
A) Build it yourself or eBay
Q) and assuming I got it, how would I go about performing the modifications to the calculator (or where could I go to find out how to do it)?
A) Why bother?
The only thing you can do with a halfnut is to change the contrast - which requires what is now rather obsolete and esoteric hardware. This with the exception of the Clonix module. Set you back about $150 or so. Just to change the contrast? You could buy a fullnut for that.
Bottom line is that you cannot exchange the LCD or any other electronic bits between the two different versions. The only interchangable parts are the case bottom, case middle, battery tray, battery/port connector and the port covers. Okay, a couple of capacitors too.
If you like the display of a fullnut, buy a fullnut.
If you like the display of the halfnut, buy a halfnut.
Or buy one of each :)
Edited: 20 July 2006, 8:54 p.m.