dan@Apple.COM (Dan Allen) (04/04/91)
Well, with Jake's recent review of the HP-32S II, I could not resist and so I went out and bought my 14th (!) HP calculator, an HP-32S II. Now, I already had the HP-32S, but the model II is pretty slick. It is an excellent size and has the best display of any HP calculator made! The numbers are very large and readable. With its newer Solver function, the 32S is quite a handy little machine. Of course, just like UNITS make a case for buying an HP-48, fractions make the case for the 32S II. Well, inside my manual is a single slip of paper called UPDATE which says the following: Do not set flag 9 to display fractions in the "fixed demoninator" mode. This mode, described in chapter 5, "Fractions", does not work correctly. Strangely enough, I HAVE set flag 9 and it SEEMS to work as advertised. So the question is, what is wrong with this mode? Anyone know? What this mode does is allow a fixed denominator to be input, like 60, and all fractions will be displayed as n/60. Anyway, the 32S II looks like it will hold me for a few weeks until the 95LX is supposed to be released. Dan Allen Apple Computer
sjthomas@cup.portal.com (Stephen J Thomas) (04/04/91)
Jake Schwartz's review also "coerced" me to get a 32SII, mainly to play with the fraction system. I remember looking at the original 32S in a catalog store, and only thought: YUK. But the 32SII is a much improved machine. I don't have my manual or notes in front of me right now (and my manual did not have the "anomaly" insert), but -- if I remember correctly -- the flag setting (8?) to produce denominators which are factors of the specified /c denominator does not always work correctly. I haven't noticed a problem with the flag 9 mode (yet :-) ). Stephen J Thomas sjthomas@cup.portal.com
akcs.egarcia@hpcvbbs.UUCP (Edwin Garcia) (04/22/91)
Let's not get too excited about the so-called "fractions" mode on the HP-32S II... After all, that mode had already existed on many other calculators such as Texas Instruments, Casio, etc. Tell ya one thing, though--HP can get a jump on its rivals by sticking this "fractions" mode onto one of its financial calculators. All the firms on Wall Street could use such a calculator, since stock prices are quoted in 1/8th's, 1/16's, and bond prices go as far as 1/64th's. If I were HP, I would add special "one-touch" keys for the most commonly used denominators in the securities industry (8th's thru 64th's) so that the "dot dot 6 4" could be typed in one keystroke instead of 4 keystrokes as it currently takes on the HP-32S II. (HP calculator designers, are you listening? :-)
akcs.joehorn@hpcvbbs.UUCP (Joseph K. Horn) (04/23/91)
Edwin Garcia says "[The HP 32SII fraction mode] already existed on many other calculators such as Texas Instruments, Casio, Etc." No way! That's like saying "Don't get excited about the HP 48SX's ability to do unit conversions; Casio's have unit conversions right on the keyboard!" Casio's "a b/c" key is so utterly brain dead compared to the 32SII's FDISP mode that the comparison is ludicrous. And NOBODY else's calculators take a decimal answer and convert it to its fractional equivalent. -- Joseph K. Horn -- Peripheral Vision, Ltd. -- "This is not my 'opinion'. It is Truth." -- Rush Limbaugh
akcs.egarcia@hpcvbbs.UUCP (Edwin Garcia) (04/23/91)
Joe, the intent of my message was not to compare whose "fraction" mode was better than the other... the gist of it was that the idea of performing arithmetic on fractional numbers and interconverting between fractionals and decimals is not novel to Hewlett-Packard; the idea had existed for many years and was implemented a long time ago on TI, Sharp, and Casio calculators. I merely found it somewhat amusing that there appeared to be a slight bit of excitement over the introduction of this feature on Hewlett-Packard calculators... in my opinion HP should have added this feature a long time ago, and frankly I am puzzled as to why it is being added only now... Come now, old chap, we must give proper credit to the efforts of our worthy rivals, even though they still use that bloody algebraic operating system! :-)
rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) (04/26/91)
In article <2813bb3e:2620.3comp.sys.handhelds;1@hpcvbbs.UUCP> akcs.joehorn@hpcvbbs.UUCP (Joseph K. Horn) writes: >Edwin Garcia says "[The HP 32SII fraction mode] already existed on many >other calculators such as Texas Instruments, Casio, Etc." > >No way! That's like saying "Don't get excited about the HP 48SX's >ability to do unit conversions; Casio's have unit conversions right on >the keyboard!" > >Casio's "a b/c" key is so utterly brain dead compared to the 32SII's >FDISP mode that the comparison is ludicrous. > >And NOBODY else's calculators take a decimal answer and convert it to its >fractional equivalent. At least not built in... it's incredibly easy and trivial to do with a short program. Knowing HP, however, it's probably an algorithm that's an order of magnitude faster than anything normally implemented. I will agree with the Casio brain dead fractions comment.
akcs.joehorn@hpcvbbs.UUCP (Joseph K. Horn) (04/26/91)
Edwin Garcia writes: > Performing arithmetic on fractional numbers and interconverting > between fractionals and decimals is not novel to Hewlett-Packard; the > idea had existed for many years and was implemented a long time ago > on TI, Sharp, and Casio calculators. --- "It's twoo! It's twoo!" [Tweety Bird] You are correct; the IDEA of calculator fractions is surely nothing new. I've used the Casio fraction key for years, poor as it is... > I merely found it somewhat amusing that there appeared to be a slight > bit of excitement over the introduction of this feature on Hewlett- > Packard calculators. --- "Non sequitur; your data is uncoordinated." [Nomad] The HP 32SII's fraction package deserves all the excitement it receives, and more. Here's why: THERE'S NOTHING ELSE LIKE IT. The HP 48 is the only other calculator in the world which will convert a decimal result (say, log 5) to fractional form, with user-settable precision. (Casio etc only convert fractions to decimals, not vice versa). AND the HP 32SII is the ONLY calculator which converts decimal-to- fraction with a user-settable maximum denominator (you don't want anything smaller than 100ths? no problem). It's also ALONE in being able to "fix" the denominator permanently to any given value (you want 16ths? you get 16ths, even if it's 6/16). And it ALONE has a "factors of denominator" mode in which the 32SII always displays the user-defined denominator OR a proper factor thereof (so 6/16 shows as 3/8). AND the user-input of fractions doesn't require some peculiar key like everybody else uses; for the FIRST TIME EVER, the decimal point key has two uses: one press means "point", but two presses means "fraction" (so 1+2/3 is entered as 1.2.3). As if that weren't enough, they even allowed you to use this simple syntax IN PROGRAMS! (Key 6.7.8 in program mode, and 6.875 gets entered as an RPN program line!) > In my opinion HP should have added this feature a long time ago, and > frankly I am puzzled as to why it is being added only now. --- "If something's worth doing, it's worth overdoing." [R.J. Nelson] You know HP; they don't duplicate other companies' work. They build novel solutions. The fraction package in the HP 32SII is something NEW. It is only being added now because Rome was not built in a day. > Come now, old chap, we must give proper credit to the efforts of our > worthy rivals, even though they still use that bloody algebraic > operating system! :-) --- "The calculator that has no equal." [Hewlett Packard] Edwin, I cannot consider TI etc "worthy rivals" of HP calculators. Are Timex watches "worthy rivals" of HP's Cesium Beam atomic clocks? Are Radio Shack's voltmeters worthy rivals of HP's signal analyzers? Are tape measures worthy rivals of HP's Laser Position Transducers? Is litmus paper a worthy rival of HP's Chromatographs? Is a doctor's rubber hammer a worthy rival of HP's Ultrasound Imaging systems? :-) Certainly Timex, Radio Shack et al deserve and enjoy some market share, as do TI, Sharp and Casio. Just because they are not in HP's league doesn't mean that they suck. But "worthy rivals" of HP??? Naaaa! -- Joseph K. Horn -- Peripheral Vision, Ltd. -- "The opinions expressed by the host of this show are not necessarily those of this station. But they ought to be." [Rush Limbaugh]
akcs.egarcia@hpcvbbs.UUCP (Edwin Garcia) (04/26/91)
Joe, you seem to be a strongly opinionated person, based on the acerbic tone of your messages here. However, you must remember that people's opinions vary; what may seem to be an "exciting" feature to one may seem rather trivial to another. Of course, there are different ways of expressing one's opinion. One can choose to be calm and reasonable and polite, or one can be emotional and zealous and attempt to humiliate or denigrate an opposing point of view by using such devices as capitalized words, one-line quotes as though they corroborate one's point of view, quotes from canaries being chased by inept felines, and yes--even quotes from a robot which, you do remember, later realized that its logic was so defective that it had to "eliminate" itself by committing suicide, etc. etc. Having said that, I think we need to clear up a few things here; most of the people on hpcvbbs--myself included--would readily agree that we enjoy using HP products. I like HP's handhelds that I even collect some of their old models (you've probably seen my message to Dan Allen @apple.com regarding HP-35's). But does our love of HP mean we need to share the same "excitement threshhold" for each improvement that HP makes in its handhelds? I think not... You are obviously very excited about HP's implementation of the fraction mode on its newer models. I am happy you are excited about their *implementation*. I believe you made an innocent mistake in misconstruing the content of my original message as being a lack of excitement for their *implementation* as opposed to being a lack of excitement for *innovation*. My message was intended to show that HP did not innovate the idea of manipulating fractions on handhelds, yet for some reason you took it as a criticism of their *implementation*. You mentioned that HP is the calculator that has no equal and if something is worth doing, it's worth overdoing, etc. Oh come come, we are all aware that even HP has its share of problems sometimes. Do you remember the Series 30 (Series E) HP handhelds? The quality of assembly was so bad and the reports of burned out LED displays and malfunctioning keyboards--and yes, some units even had missing chips on the circuit board--were so numerous that even the engineers at Texas Instruments were in stitches laughing at the apparent downturn in HP reliability. For every good feature you'll find a bad one; one example is speed of plotting on the 28S and the 48SX. To this day both units are slower in plotting a graph than a Casio. Does that mean Casio's better all of a sudden? For the moment, Casio has the edge only in plot speed, HP has the edge somewhere else, etc. Tradeoffs, we must live with these annoying tradeoffs. And you mentioned that the decimal point key on the 32S-II serves two functions as though this were some grand innovation. Well if you really want to take an extreme example of this, do you remember the Sinclair calculators that were released by Sir Clive Sinclair? To save keyboard space they even stuck five functions on the same key (three of the functions depended on how often you pressed the key); the first time you pressed the key it would give you a decimal point, the second time you pressed it would activate the exponent display, and the third press would change the sign of the exponent. Hoo boy! Now that was handy, packing that all into one key. It seemed like a good idea at the time until some people started accidentally hitting the key twice when they only needed a decimal point, which forced the user to hit it two more times to get rid of the exponent display and change sign operator (to this day I thank the gods of calculator design that HP engineers decided to place these three functions on three separate keys, rather than adopting Sir Clive's unique idea...) So this idea of having one key acting differently depending on how many times it was pressed was hardly a Hewlett-Packard invention. But, getting back to the discussion of tradeoffs, sometimes there are even tradeoffs in designing new versions of the same calculator. For instance, on the 32S I had to wind through a seemingly endless array of menus to get to some commonly used functions. Example, on the 11C it only took two keystrokes to get the standard deviation, however it takes four keystrokes on the 32S. But you see, even the folks at HP realize when they make these bumbling tradeoff errors (the "improved" HP 32S-II now takes only 3 keystrokes to get the standard deviation which is a step in the right direction, but oh, how I long for the good old days). You know, there is something to be said about the current predilection for over-menuizing and over-functionizing our handheld calculators these days. The design of HP's calculators is becoming more and more baroque; in other words they are adding so many functions that the user never feels he has true command of the machine. If I had to make an analogy I would say that the situation resembles the difference between the Ada programming language (a large, unwieldy computer programming language chock full of features) versus small, simple, compact languages like Pascal and C, which give you the basic *tools* you need to get going, without overburdening you with things you don't need. I once read a message on a bbs somewhere that said a woman who saw the 48SX for the first time remarked upon seeing the monstruous plethora of function legends above each key, "Gawd, what a geeky-looking calculator!" There is much wisdom in the intuition of an ingenue...
laird@think.com (Laird Popkin) (04/27/91)
In article <281794a9:2620.5comp.sys.handhelds;1@hpcvbbs.UUCP> akcs.joehorn@hpcvbbs.UUCP (Joseph K. Horn) writes: >Edwin Garcia writes: > >> In my opinion HP should have added this feature a long time ago, and >> frankly I am puzzled as to why it is being added only now. > >--- "If something's worth doing, it's worth overdoing." [R.J. Nelson] > >You know HP; they don't duplicate other companies' work. They build >novel solutions. The fraction package in the HP 32SII is something >NEW. It is only being added now because Rome was not built in a day. You're kidding, right? Manipulating fractions is fairly trivial -- I can't imagine that it could possibly have taken a programmer more than a day to implement fractions. Sure, it's nice, but hardly earth shattering. And as far as "they don't duplicate other company's work" you must be kidding. HP makes some pretty good IBM _clones_ (unless you consider an almost unused IR "touchscreen" on some models fundamental innovation). And the 95LX ispretty obviously HP's attempt to catch up in a market created by Poquet and Atari. > >> Come now, old chap, we must give proper credit to the efforts of our >> worthy rivals, even though they still use that bloody algebraic >> operating system! :-) > >--- "The calculator that has no equal." [Hewlett Packard] > >Edwin, I cannot consider TI etc "worthy rivals" of HP calculators. >Are Timex watches "worthy rivals" of HP's Cesium Beam atomic clocks? >Are Radio Shack's voltmeters worthy rivals of HP's signal analyzers? >Are tape measures worthy rivals of HP's Laser Position Transducers? >Is litmus paper a worthy rival of HP's Chromatographs? Is a doctor's >rubber hammer a worthy rival of HP's Ultrasound Imaging systems? :-) > >Certainly Timex, Radio Shack et al deserve and enjoy some market share, >as do TI, Sharp and Casio. Just because they are not in HP's league >doesn't mean that they suck. But "worthy rivals" of HP??? Naaaa! Look, if Casio implemented functions years before HP did, that must mean something. Not to put down HP's engineering (which is fantastic, IMHO), but there are other companies that have innovated, and other companies that have made quality products. - Laird Popkin
akcs.falco@hpcvbbs.UUCP (Andrey Dolgachev) (04/28/91)
From Laird Popkin, > From Joe Horn, >>You know HP; they don't duplicate other companies' work. They build >>novel solutions. The fraction package in the HP 32SII is something >>NEW. It is only being added now because Rome was not built in a day. > >You're kidding, right? Manipulating fractions is fairly trivial -- I >can't >imagine that it could possibly have taken a programmer more than a day >to >implement fractions. Sure, it's nice, but hardly earth shattering. There seems to be a belief from certain people that if a company creates some sort of an idea, like using fractions on a calculator, then they deserve a lot of credit, even if the idea is implemented in an awful way. Sure, the Casio had fractions before HP, so what? I had one of those calculators, and actually I remember that one of my old math-teachers had a calculator which did fractions which was prob. made in the 70's. The implementation sucked and sucks now on the Casio. All it does is convert fractiosn to decimals (ooh!) and show the fractions with that annoying symbol thing. HP did NOT duplicate the work of Casio, as Joe Horn explained, the fractions on the 32sII are on a step (actually a couple of floors) above the implementation found on the Casio. It's easier to use, it converts from decimals to fractiosn with a user-specifiable max. denominater, you can specify common denominaters which you want the fractions to be set to (like 1/8), etc. Well, Laird, maybe you could implemetn and program these functions (and make them very fast) in a day, but I guess those HP engineers ain't as ingenious as you. >And as far as "they don't duplicate other company's work" you must be >kidding. HP makes some pretty good IBM _clones_ (unless you consider an >almost unused IR "touchscreen" on some models fundamental innovation). >And the 95LX ispretty obviously HP's attempt to catch up in a market >reated by Poquet and Atari. Again, you miss the main point, HP makes it better. Come on, how can you compare the Atari Portfolio with its measly software and Ram, and speed to the power, software, 123, RAM, keyboard, look and feel of the 95LX. So what if Atari and Poquet started the market (though HP has been making DOS palmtops for a while now, the 95 is not the first Lotus-HP merger with DOS), HP made it better. Same with the IBM's, so what if IBM has been making expensive, slow PC's for longer, HP's are better. For that matter have you seen the new HP workstations? 56 and 76 MIPS! And the 56 MIPS one is not much more expensive than the IBM model 95 which runs at a whopping 15 or so (Actually, I think its less, but you get the point). HP makes awesome products, and I agree with Joe , you can't compare them with other calculators like Casio and Atari (even if they were the first to implement functiosn "years before HP did") becasue the features are still very sad. HP's rule, ------Falco
akcs.spicer@hpcvbbs.UUCP (Scott Spicer) (04/30/91)
Andrey Dolgachev (akcs.falco@hpcvbbs.UUCP) writes: > All [the Casio] does is convert fractiosn to decimals (ooh!) and > show the fractions with that annoying symbol thing. I don't have a Casio, but I know for sure that TI had a calculator out at least 4 or 5 yrs. ago that converted back and forth from fractions to decimals and vice versa, called TI College Scientific if memory serves me correctly. They also marketed a special calculator (and still do, I think) called Math Explorer to grade schools which had similary abilities to manipulate fractions. Sooooo, I hate to say it but unfortunately it looks as though Mr. Laird Popkin is right, maybe it means something that some other companies had fractions years before HP did, and there's no use bemoaning the fact that HP came last at the finish line in the race to add fractions. I'm not sure I'd completely agree with the "HP makes it better" claim when it comes to PC's, laptops, and palmtops. Better calculators maybe, but PC's? C'mon gimme a break! \\\\Scott\\\\
rrd@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Ray Depew) (05/01/91)
>And as far as "they don't duplicate other company's work" you must be >kidding. HP makes some pretty good IBM _clones_ (unless you consider an >almost unused IR "touchscreen" on some models fundamental innovation). True. Some people can even afford them. (Not me...) May I offer a slight correction to the following statement (most of which I agree with, and official HP probably would, too) ? >And the 95LX is pretty obviously HP's attempt to catch up in a market ^^^^^^^^ >created by Poquet and Atari. Try "leapfrog". Yes, the market already exists; however, this is the first "real" Palmtop PC -- it doesn't use "compatible" or "lookalike" software or OS -- it uses *real* MSDOS 3.22, *real* Lotus 1-2-3 2.2, *real* Kermit -- it's a *real* XT-compatible. I wish the Corvallis guys the best of luck with this *real* winner. Respectfully submitted, Ray Depew HP ICBD -- IC's By Dictatorship rrd@hpfitst1.hp.com Disclaimer: I don't speak for HP. I only work here.
akcs.joehorn@hpcvbbs.UUCP (Joseph K. Horn) (05/01/91)
Edwin Garcia writes: > Joe ... you mentioned that the decimal point key on the 32S-II serves > two functions as though this were some grand innovation. Well if you > really want to take an extreme example of this, do you remember the > Sinclair calculators that were released by Sir Clive Sinclair? To > save keyboard space they even stuck five functions on the same key > (three of the functions depended on how often you pressed the key); > the first time you pressed the key it would give you a decimal point, > the second time you pressed it would activate the exponent display, > and the third press would change the sign of the exponent. Hoo boy! > Now that was handy, packing that all into one key. It seemed like a > good idea at the time until some people started accidentally hitting > the key twice when they only needed a decimal point, which forced the > user to hit it two more times to get rid of the exponent display and > change sign operator (to this day I thank the gods of calculator > design that HP engineers decided to place these three functions on > three separate keys, rather than adopting Sir Clive's unique idea...) > So this idea of having one key acting differently depending on how > many times it was pressed was hardly a Hewlett-Packard invention. Thanx for pointing this out! I stand corrected. Apparently, HP foresaw the problem you mention (accidental pressing the decimal point key twice). A single backarrow undoes it, which is consistent with the way backarrow treats all numeric entries. By the way, Edwin, I did not intend to lob any thought bombs at you, just at your opinions, in a spirited debate sort of way. If my soapbox style offended you, please accept my apology; it was more tongue in cheek and intended to make you laugh than anything else (hence the silly quotes, ALL of which were aimed at your funny bone, especially the outrageous ones by that rollicking self-appointed radio expert on politics, Rush Limbaugh). Please thrust and parry with my opinions any time. I enjoy it immensely. Half the time, I wind up agreeing with the other person, and change my opinion. The rest of the time, I do my best to skewer their opinions right back. But not them. Just their opinions. It's all part of the fun. I'm sorry that my poor choice of words made it not fun. I hope to do better next time. -- Joseph K. Horn -- Peripheral Vision, Ltd. --
laird@think.com (Laird Popkin) (05/03/91)
In article <7360104@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM> rrd@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Ray Depew) writes: >>And as far as "they don't duplicate other company's work" you must be >>kidding. HP makes some pretty good IBM _clones_ (unless you consider an >>almost unused IR "touchscreen" on some models fundamental innovation). > >True. Some people can even afford them. (Not me...) > >May I offer a slight correction to the following statement (most of which >I agree with, and official HP probably would, too) ? > >>And the 95LX is pretty obviously HP's attempt to catch up in a market > ^^^^^^^^ >>created by Poquet and Atari. > >Try "leapfrog". Yes, the market already exists; however, this is the first >"real" Palmtop PC -- it doesn't use "compatible" or "lookalike" software or >OS -- it uses *real* MSDOS 3.22, *real* Lotus 1-2-3 2.2, *real* Kermit -- >it's a *real* XT-compatible. As I understand it, the Poquet runs "real" MS-DOS. In any case, the use of Microsoft's DOS and Lotus' spreadsheet is a matter of licensing as opposed to technology. The DOS clone in the Portfolio seems to work fine, and the 123 clone is a better spreadsheet than the ones I used back in '80. It's not as nifty as the latest Excel, but then neither is 123. As far as I can tell (not having used a 95LX yet) the PF and 95LX both seem to be equally DOS compatible, and either is certainly sufficient for a tiny portable extension to a desktop computer. I said it before and I'll say it again: the 95LX is more powerful machine than a Portfolio, but less powerful than a Portfolio, and priced somewhere in the middle. It may be that HP has found a better price/performance tradeoff than either Atari or Poquet, but what the guys in Corvalis have created is a nice addition to an existing market. >I wish the Corvallis guys the best of luck with this *real* winner. >Disclaimer: I don't speak for HP. I only work here. ^^ ^ ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ Wonder why he reads _this_ newsgroup. <smile> I think it'll be a whil euntil we see the palmtop Connection Machine. - Laird Popkin, Thinking Machines Connection Machine: Massively parallel supercomputer. Also a cool black cube with more blinking lights than you can shake a stick at.