[HN Gopher] DB48X: High Performance Scientific Calculator, Reinv...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       DB48X: High Performance Scientific Calculator, Reinvented
        
       Author : qwezxcrty
       Score  : 189 points
       Date   : 2024-11-04 17:19 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (48calc.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (48calc.org)
        
       | roflmaostc wrote:
       | somehow doesn't work on my Ubuntu Firefox 131.0.3 but works on my
       | Arch 132.0.
        
         | Aardwolf wrote:
         | Same, shows JavaScript error:
         | 
         | "Uncaught ReferenceError: SharedArrayBuffer is not defined at
         | db48x.js:615:40"
         | 
         | Both in Chrome and Firefox (both are up to date to versions way
         | beyond where SharedArrayBuffer should have been introduced)
         | 
         | I think they should either use ArrayBuffer, or use https
         | instead of http, apparently SharedArrayBuffer has security
         | restrictions
        
         | grantmnz wrote:
         | Apparently, for security reasons, your server needs to add
         | certain headers if you want to use SharedArrayBuffers.
         | 
         | https://hacks.mozilla.org/2020/07/safely-reviving-shared-mem...
        
         | thought_alarm wrote:
         | It needs https.
         | 
         | Use https://48calc.org/db48x/index.html
        
       | bell-cot wrote:
       | IANAL, but the logo they're using looks infringingly similar to
       | HP's.
        
       | SomeHacker44 wrote:
       | Spectacular project by one gentleman. Been using it for a while
       | now on my Swissmicros.
        
       | anyfoo wrote:
       | Seems great. How does this compare to Free42?
       | https://thomasokken.com/free42/
        
         | chowells wrote:
         | Well, it's based on the hp48 instead of the hp42, for one.
         | Though that button layout is not that close to the 48, either.
        
         | sbdhzjd wrote:
         | Free42 is more faithful to the original 42 than this is to the
         | 48. Free42 also has an infinite stack hack which is a nice
         | bridge to those accustomed to the RPL.
         | 
         | This is annoying to installe and not really completed (this is
         | a much much larger endeavor than the 42). Its also very
         | disorienting at first until you figure out the UC
         | 
         | That said, its good enough that I use it on my swisimicro
         | rather than my 48s because the screen is much better
        
       | westurner wrote:
       | Could this run on a TI or a NumWorks calculator?
       | 
       | RPN: Reverse Polish Notation:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_Polish_notation
       | 
       | RPL: Reverse Polish LISP:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPL_(programming_language)
        
       | whartung wrote:
       | Seems like a really nice effort.
       | 
       | Nice they crammed it into the DM42 machines.
       | 
       | But for me, the learning curve is steeper than the utility. I
       | have no real need for an actual calculator, I rely on my phone.
       | On there I have iHP48, and I've already gone through much of that
       | learning curve to make it useful (back in the day with an
       | original one).
       | 
       | If you already have the DM42, I guess its a mostly compatible
       | upgrade from that, to make stepping into it easier.
        
         | bayofpigs wrote:
         | Same. Love calculators and used to flirt with the idea of
         | buying an old HP graphing but the app scratches that itch. Once
         | you learn RPN it just feels so natural.
        
         | stonogo wrote:
         | This is also an iphone app.
        
         | topspin wrote:
         | > Seems like a really nice effort.
         | 
         | Does it? Another powerful calculating engine trapped behind a
         | skeuomorph interface?
         | 
         | Here[1] is a really nice effort that, sadly, hasn't been
         | updated in 14 years and only runs on Windows. It's a wonderful
         | 606kB math REPL that can probably do everything DB48X can do,
         | except it foregoes all the 1970's portable calculator nonsense,
         | making it about a thousand times more useful.
         | 
         | I have a nascent clone of this written in Rust using egui and
         | rug, that is currently stalled because -- on bleeping Windows
         | -- the former has problems with MinGW the latter has problems
         | with MSVC... which makes me want to tear my hair out. I wait,
         | patiently, for egui to get their MinGW ducks in a row because I
         | have no hope that the GMP/MPFR/MPC stack is ever going to work
         | on MSVC in my lifetime.
         | 
         | [1] https://speqmath.com/
        
           | epse wrote:
           | Is there a significant difference between that package and
           | SageMath / XCas / Octave and friends? While a bit arcane,
           | I've always been a great fan of xcas
        
             | topspin wrote:
             | Yes. SpeQ math, is extremely small, starts _instantly_ and
             | stands alone with no complex runtime.
        
           | qwezxcrty wrote:
           | Calculator is for quick and dirty math in the field or in a
           | lab, saving me from taking out the laptop from backpack or
           | abandoning my optics alignment exercise and getting to the
           | workstation on the other end of the table.
           | 
           | In other cases when I have convenient access to a computer,
           | I'll use a proper math software like Matlab/Mathematica or
           | whatever open source alternative. It's just a different use
           | case.
        
           | whartung wrote:
           | > Does it? Another powerful calculating engine trapped behind
           | a skeuomorph interface?
           | 
           | Yes, it does. This is not a calculator app. It's calculator
           | firmware that happens to also be runnable in an app.
           | 
           | They're trying to cram a HP48ish calculator into an HP42
           | clone calculator body, while retaining much of the UX of the
           | calculator they're replacing.
           | 
           | The HP42 is the direct successor of the HP41 without the
           | hardware interfaces and gizmos. Its essentially software
           | compatible with the 41.
           | 
           | The HP48 (and -28) are completely different animals, from
           | ground up hardware redesign to the notable RPL (Reverse
           | Polish Lisp) foundations, and just in raw functionality as
           | well. The 28/48 series had symbolic solvers and graphing
           | (among a laundry list of other things), both novel at the
           | time.
           | 
           | If you wanted an RPL based system in stand alone hardware
           | with real buttons, you were stuck with legacy calculators.
           | This fits in the modern DM42 system.
        
           | gompertz wrote:
           | Thanks this is a great recommendation - runs perfect in Wine.
           | There definitely seems to be a habit with developers making
           | calculators that still fall into a 70s form factor. This is a
           | great departure.
        
             | topspin wrote:
             | I really do want to clone that thing, except cross
             | platform, and enhanced with 64 bit native math. I want the
             | same exact REPL calculator and function library running
             | natively and starting instantly from a no-install binary on
             | every platform I might ever touch.
        
               | topspin wrote:
               | Oh, and make it open source, so that people that know
               | more than I about all things math can contribute. If you
               | hadn't noticed, SpeQ Math is not open source.
        
           | jiehong wrote:
           | Some newer terminal based implementation of something similar
           | is Numbat [0], for example.
           | 
           | For a GUI calculator similar to seqmath, but cross platform,
           | try speedcrunch [1].
           | 
           | [0]: https://numbat.dev/
           | 
           | [1]: https://heldercorreia.bitbucket.io/speedcrunch/
        
         | linguae wrote:
         | I feel the same way about not needing a physical calculator. I
         | have an HP-48SX and an HP-15C Collector's Edition. I enjoy
         | these devices; they are high-quality and are exemplary
         | products. However, as a professor I have regular access to my
         | laptop, which can run circles around my handheld calculators.
         | For quick calculations I open up the terminal and use the dc
         | command, which is a command-line RPN calculator. For more
         | involved computations, I have Python and Common Lisp REPLs, and
         | I also sometimes use Microsoft Excel.
         | 
         | These days handheld calculators seem to be used the most in
         | situations where people are restricted from using laptops and
         | smartphones, such as during exams or in distraction-free
         | settings. I think the reason Texas Instruments still has a
         | viable calculator business is because TI markets heavily in the
         | education market.
        
       | db48x wrote:
       | That is really weird.
        
       | PaulHoule wrote:
       | I am a fan of the HP Prime
       | 
       | https://hpcalcs.com/product/hp-prime-graphing-calculator/
       | 
       | But I use it in algebraic instead of RPN mode. I've got a 49g and
       | a 50-something too.
       | 
       | People say it is pricey but I managed to get one discounted that
       | was intended for the Latin American market. So is the thing that
       | software is supposed to run on.
        
         | nxobject wrote:
         | I'd recommend eBay, too, if you're within the continental US.
         | This might be sacrilege, but after using a TI-89 I shifted to
         | an TI Nspire CAS, since it has one of the highest-resolution
         | screens in the market _and_ still uses AAA batteries - I paid
         | only $25 on eBay.
        
           | PaulHoule wrote:
           | Those are pretty good.
           | 
           | I was thinking the other day about all the electromechanical
           | devices such as Walkman cassette tapes and portable minidisc
           | players that Sony got to work with just one AA battery as
           | opposed to the usual two.
        
         | Mister_Snuggles wrote:
         | I have a Prime G2 and the RPN mode is just bad. It feels like
         | it was an afterthought, and some things just don't seem to work
         | properly in that mode.
         | 
         | My 48G+ is a much, much better RPN calculator.
         | 
         | The Prime G2 is also missing the equation library from the
         | 48G+, which I found weird. Maybe they expect you to download
         | what you need instead of using space in Flash for it.
        
           | PaulHoule wrote:
           | That's my take on the RPN mode but I like the algebraic mode
           | and agree the 48 series is way better for RPN.
           | 
           | (My favorite HP calc was the 28, which I bought when the 48
           | was available. I discovered soon afterwards that a powerful
           | spring will eventually break the battery door and it seemed
           | to be a problem that no engineering student managed to
           | solve.)
        
             | downut wrote:
             | I use my 32S (lives on my monitor pedestal next to my 8087
             | chip) weekly. When I was doing floating point/integer bit
             | twiddling the 'base' key was my deeply appreciated friend.
             | But that was 36 years ago. RPN (if trained into the brain)
             | really is faster and I love how the register transfers
             | work.
             | 
             | Nowadays when I'm not feeling especially tactile I tend to
             | reach for the Free42 Android app, which lives in a stack
             | with the 32S. If I ever get _bored_ , I'm going to relearn
             | how to program them both. Next time around on the wheel,
             | likely, if I have hands.
             | 
             | I've replaced the battery on the 32S twice. Suck on that,
             | modernity.
        
         | wslh wrote:
         | I have an HP Prime (and older ones such as the 48gx). I don't
         | know why they remove the "undo" button from the Prime since it
         | is necessary when perform mistakes.
        
       | hajile wrote:
       | As a DM42 owner who loves RPL, this is an exciting project.
        
         | sbdhzjd wrote:
         | Its annoying to instal, I eventually got it to work on my
         | calculator (DM42) from the binaries.
         | 
         | The biggest thing is making sure all the firmware of the DM is
         | upgraded
        
       | opentokix wrote:
       | This made me exactly the same amount as frustrated like the
       | originals. So, good job I guess :D
        
       | Ringz wrote:
       | I still have a HP48GX in perfect condition and love it. One of my
       | first programs was to calculate how much ,,slower" my time is
       | running when I drive a car or fly in a plane compared to someone
       | standing still on the sidewalk.
       | 
       | I still find it much more comfortable having a real calculator...
       | call me old fashioned.
        
       | jwr wrote:
       | The 48G was a really good calculator, but only after loading
       | additional software. The HP50g that came much later is better in
       | every respect, except possibly for the smaller "ENTER" key (and
       | people used to 48G will have to change some habits and possibly
       | redefine some keys...).
       | 
       | Incidentally, many young people (yes, I know how that sounds) do
       | not know how useful a good engineering calculator can be and do
       | not want to learn how to use one. They are missing out. Yes,
       | there is a steep learning curve, but the rewards are significant
       | if you do any amount of calculation in your hobby or work. No,
       | this is not replaced by typing "python" (or "bc", or anything
       | else, really) at your command prompt.
       | 
       | Also incidentally, the development of good engineering
       | calculators pretty much died. HP Prime is largely a school-
       | pleasing toy, HP would down their calculator division a long time
       | ago, and nobody else produces anything good. It's kind of like
       | with gyms: what you get is what the market wants, and since the
       | market doesn't know much, you get gyms full of useless exercise
       | machines, because that's what people think a good gym should
       | have. Similarly with calculators: you get stupid "modern"
       | graphing calculators which are useless for actual work (it takes
       | forever to use them to calculate useful things, and graphing is
       | much better done on a computer), but they look great and sell
       | well.
       | 
       | I admire the project, although I would probably have taken a
       | different path (emulation) to get the biggest effect with the
       | smallest possible effort :-)
       | 
       | I wish there was a good HP50G emulator for iOS -- there used to
       | be one, but it was abandoned (contact me if you want to develop
       | it and would like to get the source code, it was under the GPL
       | and I got it from the author).
        
         | ninalanyon wrote:
         | > No, this is not replaced by typing "python" (or "bc", or
         | anything else, really) at your command prompt.
         | 
         | Why not? At least I can easily copy the results and the code to
         | a document which avoids transcription errors. Or do you mean
         | that there simply isn't a program that has the functions you
         | use?
        
           | tivert wrote:
           | >> Incidentally, many young people (yes, I know how that
           | sounds) do not know how useful a good engineering calculator
           | can be and do not want to learn how to use one. They are
           | missing out. Yes, there is a steep learning curve, but the
           | rewards are significant if you do any amount of calculation
           | in your hobby or work. No, this is not replaced by typing
           | "python" (or "bc", or anything else, really) at your command
           | prompt.
           | 
           | > Why not? At least I can easily copy the results and the
           | code to a document which avoids transcription errors. Or do
           | you mean that there simply isn't a program that has the
           | functions you use?
           | 
           | My guess it's the ergonomics between a specialized tool and a
           | non-specialized one. Technically, python may be able to
           | replace "a good engineering calculator," _but so can ASM._ No
           | one would even ask  "Why non ASM?," because its ergonomics
           | are near-universally understood to be so poor, but the same
           | issues can apply to more popular tools like python, just less
           | obviously.
        
             | 7thaccount wrote:
             | I'm a calculator nut who has had many fancy TI (like the
             | Voyage 200) and HP calculators (yes RPN) including the
             | SwissMicro reproductions.
             | 
             | The ONLY benefit to these tools that I can surmise is
             | basically that they are a physical device for scientists or
             | others in the lab or field and not in front of a computer.
             | 
             | For any kind of data work I've seen, Excel, R, Python,
             | Mathematica, or Matlab are all vastly superior. They allow
             | faster entry, can show large amounts of data on screen, can
             | allow for saving large amounts of data ...etc.
        
               | exe34 wrote:
               | yeah after a decade in my job, I have a ton of utility
               | functions in python that I reach for when given a new
               | request to think through something. I doubt a smaller
               | screen where I have to type in stuff and then copy out
               | results would make it any easier.
        
               | jwr wrote:
               | This thread is making my point for me rather well.
        
               | exe34 wrote:
               | yes a lot of people love them, but nobody's actually
               | coming up with anything I can't do in python...
        
               | jwr wrote:
               | You can do everything in Python. But perhaps it is not
               | the best tool for every job.
               | 
               | This is similar to programming language discussions: any
               | programming language can be discredited by saying "but I
               | can do all that in assembly/C/whatever". Yes, you can,
               | but perhaps there are better ways to do it.
        
               | exe34 wrote:
               | usually with programming languages, we mention certain
               | things - like how python is easier to read, it's almost
               | like English. it comes with dozens of well designed
               | built-in libraries to do a lot of useful things, and
               | thousands of external libraries to do the rest - even
               | gluing together c/Fortran code for the speedup. it's well
               | supported on many platforms so you can design on one
               | comfortable os environment and deploy in a scalable one.
               | 
               | for the engineering calculators, it seems the advantage
               | is that some people learnt to use them in school and
               | really love using them? that's great, I'm tempted to look
               | into them myself, because it does sound cool to have a
               | small device that does that sort of thing while I'm
               | reading a book. but the truth is that for me, both at
               | work and at home, my laptop is never more than 5 seconds
               | away from showing me a repl, so maybe I'm not the target
               | audience.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | When all you have is a hammer arguments are so much fun
        
               | exe34 wrote:
               | every now and again, I download the user manual for a
               | graphing calculator and every time I've been underwhelmed
               | by what they have to offer.
               | 
               | What impresses me in this discussion is how coy everybody
               | has been about the actual benefits of these devices.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | What impresses me is how you dismiss the usefulness to
               | other people because you can't imagine it possibly being
               | useful to someone because it's not useful to you
        
               | exe34 wrote:
               | I don't believe I've done that? I've said it doesn't
               | appear that it would be useful to me - and I keep asking,
               | probably for the 5th time now, in what way is it useful?
               | The most cogent reply I've had so far is "0.85f'c". I
               | don't know what that means. Please, could you explain? At
               | this point I feel that even Apple fanboys put more effort
               | in justifying their choices.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | Do you like pen or pencil? Do you like college rule or
               | wide rule paper? Do you like spiral or perf notebooks?
               | 
               | I don't need to justify my reasoning to you in a way that
               | convinces you your way is wrong and mine is right. People
               | like different things. I learned to use a scientific
               | calculator as an extracurricular competition that allowed
               | me to become very proficient at 10-key. Because of that,
               | doing calculations on a computer goes against muscle
               | memory. Laptops don't even have a 10-key. If I have a
               | bunch of notes/papers with numbers that need to be added,
               | I can pull out a calculator and just do the data entry
               | and get a result. I don't have to go to my computer, or
               | lug the laptop around in the shop. I just need numbers
               | quickly crunched so I can then turn around and make a
               | cut, drill a hole, or whatever. I don't need a large
               | clunky compute device for that. Dropping a calculator on
               | the shop floor is much less expensive than doing the same
               | with a laptop. Lots of time, I just don't feel like
               | needing to write a damn script just to get the
               | tangent/cosine of a value to determine the lengths of the
               | whatever.
               | 
               | Again, just because you have a hammer doesn't mean that
               | you _should_ use it drive that screw. Sometimes that tool
               | that specifically made for purpose is better for the task
               | at hand.
               | 
               | Now, pick any of the aforementioned options as to why I
               | might prefer a calculator over a programming env just to
               | crunch some numbers.
        
               | exe34 wrote:
               | Thank you for explaining! So it's down to personal
               | preference and invested training time, I wish you would
               | just have said that to begin with. It's your hammer and
               | you see everything as a nail. Got it.
        
               | rustcleaner wrote:
               | I declare thee argument winner! Well done chap!
        
               | hggigg wrote:
               | Some of us (mathematics side) still actually work on
               | paper with calculators. Most of the job is thinking which
               | tooling doesn't necessarily improve.
        
               | zokier wrote:
               | > Most of the job is thinking which tooling doesn't
               | necessarily improve
               | 
               | yet you use paper and calculator.
        
               | hggigg wrote:
               | near the end of the thinking yes.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | That's like a carpenter saying it only took 10 seconds to
               | make that cut while ignoring the 3 hours it took to
               | create the jig so the cut would take 10 seconds.
               | 
               | You don't need the calculator to do the final sums until
               | you've done all of the work gathering all of the data
               | that needs to be calculated. It doesn't mean the
               | calculator wasn't needed, just that it's only needed for
               | one thing not every step along the way.
               | 
               | This wasn't the gotcha you think it was
        
               | SirHumphrey wrote:
               | I don't use the physical HP50G i have that often, but i
               | love it emulated on the phone. It's for semi complicated
               | quick calculations where scientific calculator interface
               | really shines compared to anything else available.
        
             | 0x1ceb00da wrote:
             | We need a concrete example.
        
               | wiredfool wrote:
               | 0.85f'c
        
               | exe34 wrote:
               | What does it mean?
        
           | hggigg wrote:
           | You just write the stuff down or translate it to LaTeX.
           | 
           | Incidentally the 50G (and Prime) has a decent CAS built in
           | which seems to get stuck less than some other commercial
           | ones.
        
         | agateau wrote:
         | I loved my HP 48G when I was in school (even if it was much
         | slower than the Ti 81 it replaced when it came to graphing). I
         | regret throwing it away because of the nostalgia, but I don't
         | feel a need for using it these days.
         | 
         | As such I am genuinely curious about what rewards you get from
         | using an engineering calculator in your work. That's an honest
         | question: I would really like to have an excuse to get my hands
         | on a 48G again!
        
           | zoky wrote:
           | I broke the screen of my HP48GX when it fell in the crack of
           | the passenger seat of my truck about 20 years ago and I am
           | _still_ pissed about it.
        
             | ceving wrote:
             | Try Droid48 on your phone. It works for me after I cracked
             | a number key of my HP48GX.
        
               | zoky wrote:
               | Oh, I've tried using emulators, but without the actual
               | physical keyboard it's just not the same.
        
         | hggigg wrote:
         | I never liked the 48 series or the 50G (I own both) that much.
         | I can never remember how to use them half of the time. I always
         | end up back with my 38 year old HP 15c. That has done me
         | through separate engineering and mathematics degrees and about
         | 30 years worth of jobs.
         | 
         | They just issued new ones as well! (HP 15CE)
        
         | perth wrote:
         | TBH TI-89 titanium is a better engineering calculator since the
         | UI is way better. I have both a HP50G and a TI-89 titanium and
         | I've done way more useful engineering work on the TI-89
         | titanium just because it's so much easier and accessible. Also
         | of course, BASIC is a lot easier than reverse polish lisp for
         | making some quick scripts.
         | 
         | Also I will add, there are known symbolic math issues on the
         | HP50G due to the CAS system it uses. I will see if I can find a
         | link.
        
           | hggigg wrote:
           | I've used both extensively. I disagree with this. I dislike
           | the HP48 series but I dislike the TI89 more. It's probably
           | because most people don't understand how to use the 50G
           | properly. You really need to go through the HP training video
           | ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTPruRVV-e8 ). Incidentally
           | if you haven't watched that it's worth watching on its own -
           | great production! In an engineering context, the 48-series
           | was designed to produce small composable reusable programs
           | and tools in the file tree which can be executed quickly.
           | 
           | Try a quick EE example for parallel resistor calculation that
           | takes 2 and puts 1 value back on stack
           | 
           | << 1/X SWAP 1/X + 1/X >>
           | 
           | Store that in RPAR in whatever directory you want or HOME.
           | Then you whack in 2 resistors and hit the RPAR F-key. There
           | is nothing faster or more efficient than that.
           | 
           | I still use a 15C all the time though. Even easier! 99% of
           | what I do is on paper though and ends up getting chucked in
           | the numeric solver.
        
           | Aardwolf wrote:
           | For something that requires writing BASIC (or RPL for that
           | matter), I think I'd rather use a programming language on a
           | PC
           | 
           | However, keystroke programming a calculator, where you can
           | still somewhat do simple loops with goto-like constructs when
           | needed, strikes the right balance for the limited UI of a
           | calculator
           | 
           | So something like the HP 15C is nice.
        
           | snvzz wrote:
           | Got both as well (TI-89v2 and hp50g).
           | 
           | TI-89 preferred by far. hp50g UX is bad, particularly the
           | latency makes me sick.
        
         | analog31 wrote:
         | I'm one of the last people at my workplace to use a calculator.
         | I'm a scientist, not an engineer, so I use a scientific
         | calculator. ;-)
         | 
         | The schools ruined calculators.
         | 
         | I still find a calculator handy, even when I've already got
         | Python going on my PC. It's easier to use the calculator with
         | one hand, especially in the workshop. You can get a Casio solar
         | at Target for 10 bucks.
         | 
         | My wife really prefers RPN, so I gave her my last HP when hers
         | died.
        
           | makapuf wrote:
           | I guess the lack of workshops made also calculators
           | disappear.
        
         | rhelz wrote:
         | // many young people (yes, I know how that sounds) do not know
         | how useful a good engineering calculator //
         | 
         | It's ok, I sound like that too. The problem is that in order to
         | be acceptable for school use, calculators have to be so
         | lobotomized that they are useless for real engineering work.
         | The keyboard cannot be qwerty, it has to have lockdown modes
         | which shut off functionality, etc etc.
         | 
         | Frankly, as a math teacher, I'd be just as happy if my students
         | could program their calculators to help them on assignments and
         | tests.
         | 
         | // I wish there was a good HP50G emulator for iOS//
         | 
         | A calculator has to have buttons man :-)
        
           | nxobject wrote:
           | The "no QWERTY rule" that standardized testing boards have is
           | _absurd_. TI has a calculator with a dedicated alphabet
           | keyboard cluster and a return key (the Nspire Touchpad)...
           | except the keys have to be arranged in alphabetical order,
           | because otherwise the College Board says no.
        
         | wwweston wrote:
         | > but only after loading additional software
         | 
         | which additional software?
         | 
         | Also, these two statements:
         | 
         | > it takes forever to use them to calculate useful things, and
         | graphing is much better done on a computer
         | 
         | > the rewards are significant if you do any amount of
         | calculation in your hobby or work. No, this is not replaced by
         | typing "python" (or "bc", or anything else, really) at your
         | command prompt
         | 
         | seem like they're at odds. If a computer has a considerable
         | processing speed advantage and better display plotting
         | capabilities, what's the value prop of the HP/RPL environment
         | over python/bc/anythingElseReally?
         | 
         | (I have a 48G, clearly I may not have gotten high enough on the
         | learning curve, your answer could be relevant to my decision to
         | keep it or send it on into the world)
        
         | 0x1ceb00da wrote:
         | > No, this is not replaced by typing "python" (or "bc", or
         | anything else, really) at your command prompt.
         | 
         | Why?
        
           | akira2501 wrote:
           | Built in algebra system. Mathematica is nice. Also very
           | expensive.
        
             | whatshisface wrote:
             | Take a look at Sage (for PCs) and khikas (for calculators).
        
               | jfim wrote:
               | Do you mean KhiCAS?
        
               | whatshisface wrote:
               | Yes.
        
             | jfim wrote:
             | For those of us that used those calculators in engineering
             | class, the math that is displayed by the calculator also
             | looks like what's in the textbook, making it easy to check
             | if one has entered the right thing in the calculator.
             | 
             | Here's a simple example from their documentation:
             | https://education.ti.com/en/customer-support/knowledge-
             | base/...
             | 
             | Using the Python repl doesn't display nice math as far as I
             | know (let me know if there's a way to make it so it), as
             | you'd have in an environment for doing symbolic math (eg. h
             | ttps://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=integrate+sin+x+dx+from
             | ... )
             | 
             | Another thing if I remember correctly one could do is
             | something like 3_ft*3_ft>_m^2 to convert 9 square feet in
             | square meters, and do things like keep units throughout a
             | calculation as a quick check that the calculator input is
             | sane.
        
         | bankcust08385 wrote:
         | The HP 48GX got me through from high school college prep to
         | EE/CS. I also happen to own an HP 48 overhead projector display
         | and a thermal printer. Now, I just need an overhead projector
         | to even use (the former). Sharing software was the killer app
         | of the HP 48 G series, and the app that turned the serial IR
         | port into a universal learning remote was a pranksters' dream
         | because the IR LED was so overpowered.
        
         | lencastre wrote:
         | Don't mean to highjack but I was on the TI-89 camp, and I
         | barely scratched the surface of its programming capabilities
         | and memory. But it did help a lot with earthquake engineering
         | and other mechanical dynamics courses in the university.
         | Chugging a 6 kg laptop was impractical and this little TI was a
         | beast!
        
           | nxobject wrote:
           | EE*PRO to the rescue for me!
        
         | tenkabuto wrote:
         | > It's kind of like with gyms: what you get is what the market
         | wants, and since the market doesn't know much, you get gyms
         | full of useless exercise machines, because that's what people
         | think a good gym should have.
         | 
         | I'm curious: what should a good gym have?
        
           | jwr wrote:
           | Squat rack, barbell+weights and bench as a minimum, bonus
           | points for a pull-up bar and bars for triceps dips.
           | 
           | Most machines in gyms are either mostly useless, or actually
           | detrimental to your health and fitness.
        
             | stavros wrote:
             | Can't really disagree with that.
        
             | DiskoHexyl wrote:
             | That works relatively well until you get injured, which,
             | for people who train seriously, is almost inevitable. Then
             | you have to train around said injury either temporarly or
             | permantently and find great use for various machines.
             | 
             | Or you get to a high enough level (for you genetics), where
             | targeting a specific area is more efficient with some kind
             | of a machine.
             | 
             | Or you've been training for many years and are now getting
             | older- lots of folks can't really bench after about 40, and
             | same goes for the dips.
             | 
             | Doing compound lifts is a great way to build both strength
             | and muscle mass, but it is a bit myopic to call machines
             | useless. Nuance is important.
             | 
             | Must admit that I'm not a competitor in lifting, and it is
             | only a secondary hobby, but 1.83x body weight bench isn't
             | completely laughable either
        
         | bsder wrote:
         | > The HP50g that came much later is better in every respect
         | 
         | Absolutely not. The big fail on everything after the 48SX was
         | the _keyboard_.
         | 
         | I could sit in an exam and punch buttons _without even looking
         | at the calculator_. I could feel the positive  "click" from
         | every single keypress, and I don't remember my 48SX ever
         | dropping a keypress for any basic operation.
         | 
         | By contrast, the 49/50 series had mushy keyboards that bounced
         | or failed to register presses. I still have 3 48SX calculators
         | that I can use--I sold all my 49/50 series.
         | 
         | The excellent keyboard is _bar none_ the big feature that I can
         | 't duplicate with any modern calculator.
         | 
         | I really wish some mechanical engineer would do a teardown on
         | the old HP calulators and analyze why the keyboards were so
         | damn good.
        
           | zoky wrote:
           | The 48GX you mean, but yes. The keyboard on the 48 series was
           | _chef 's kiss_. The keyboard on anything after that was
           | complete dogshit.
           | 
           | If it weren't for the crap keyboard I would still be using HP
           | calculators to this day. I blame Carly Fiorina, personally.
        
         | sitkack wrote:
         | If the source is GPL, why not release it?
        
         | MegaDeKay wrote:
         | Thank you for putting in a good word for "real" calculators. My
         | HP-15c is always within reach.
         | 
         | Solid list of basic gym equipment as well. I'd add a good
         | dumbbell set to your list unless you lumped those under
         | "weights". A few different types of bars, a dip belt for adding
         | weight to dips and pullups, and a low / mid / high cable set
         | with various handles are also nice to have. Bonus points for a
         | reverse hyper.
        
         | whartung wrote:
         | What do you think distinguishes the HP-50 from the 48, 49? I
         | had a 48 and 49.
         | 
         | There were form factor and interface changes, the 50 is an ARM
         | running a simulator vs the original Saturn architecture,
         | there's the SD card.
         | 
         | What are the key software changes?
         | 
         | Better CAS?
         | 
         | I admittedly don't use it in any great depth (I did in the
         | past), but the iHP48 is a very nice HP-48 for iOS. And it
         | solves my primary complaint with the originals, a backlight.
        
         | dingnuts wrote:
         | >Incidentally, many young people (yes, I know how that sounds)
         | do not know how useful a good engineering calculator can be and
         | do not want to learn how to use one. They are missing out. Yes,
         | there is a steep learning curve, but the rewards are
         | significant if you do any amount of calculation in your hobby
         | or work. No, this is not replaced by typing "python" (or "bc",
         | or anything else, really) at your command prompt.
         | 
         | I feel like this is highly role-dependent. I learned on an HP
         | and I have my TI-89 from high school sitting on my desk,
         | because I thought it might be useful. I never touch it. I never
         | do math that's more difficult than arithmetic, and if I needed
         | to do calculus or algebra for some reason I'd reach for
         | Mathematica -- it's not like I remember calculus class anyway.
         | 
         | Hell I tried to help someone younger with algebra and forgot
         | FOIL. I'm a successful distributed systems engineer. Why do I
         | need an engineering calculator?
        
       | mongol wrote:
       | The form factor of an HP48 or similar calculator is very
       | attractive. Good tactile buttons in a format slightly laeger than
       | a modern smartphone. I imagine it could work as a very good
       | companion to a smartphone ifbit had modern comoute capacity and
       | memory plus some modern I/O interfaces like USB or Bluetooth.
        
       | tooltechgeek wrote:
       | The Casio fx-9750GIII though very poorly named is a gem full of
       | functionality from python, to spreadsheet and even a text editor
       | and very low priced for what it does. If HP made a similar
       | product with RPN it would be a game changer.
        
       | codefeenix wrote:
       | If some sufficiently intense compute calculations were ran, will
       | the display that shows the battery voltage drop?
        
       | sbdhzjd wrote:
       | I have it installed on my DM42. Its nice, but I dont like two
       | things:
       | 
       | - Where's the apostrophe (equiv. to quote in lisp)? That should
       | be an easily accessible key not buried in a menu.
       | 
       | - Why did he swap the log keys?
       | 
       | I also wish the HP48's steq interface to plot existed, but
       | whatever.
        
       | bankcust08385 wrote:
       | I think it should be a tribute to Claude-Nicolas Fiechter, Mika
       | Heiskanen, and Bernard Parisse who came up with Erable. There is
       | Giac/Xcas now that it is its spiritual successor.
        
         | ta8645 wrote:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erable
        
       | ashton314 wrote:
       | I've got an HP50g that I love. I wish I could get my kids a
       | SwissMicros calculator when they go to school but $300 is a
       | little steep for a kid's calculator.
       | 
       | (Heck, considering what TI charges for their crapulators, maybe
       | it's _not_ such an outrageous price...)
        
       | mabster wrote:
       | It's not clear from that page nor the GitHub repo whether they
       | are using decimal floating point underneath? It's one of the
       | nicer things when using a calculator over something like Python.
        
       | recri wrote:
       | https://hp15c.elf.org wraps https://hp15c.com/, calculators make
       | lovely web apps on smart phones, collect them all!
        
         | jiehong wrote:
         | That's cool!
        
       | rustcleaner wrote:
       | I love SwissMicros. I own a DM42 and DM15L. I strongly reccomend
       | them for everyone young-to-old!
       | 
       | Buttons feel crisp and responsive, the postfix input is a dream I
       | can't remember living without; it's also easy to disassemble too!
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-11-05 23:01 UTC)