A132 I have a couple of 48sx's and I'd like to know how to get the rom version of every machine. I know is not like the 48g or 49 because I've type VERSION and it don't work. . ==== I have a couple of 48sx's and I'd like to know how to get the rom > version of every machine. I know is not like the 48g or 49 because I've type VERSION and it > don't work. Any binary transfer from any 48 series starts with a header, HPHP48-x, where x is the ROM version, so you could transfer something in binary mode and look at the file on the other device. Or you could run (be careful to type in the argument exactly, including as a hex binary integer, if you want to retain memory): # 30794h SYSEVAL to get the binary transfer header as a string in level 1. This also works on any 48 series. Or, on the 48S series only: First, be prepared for a warmstart. You could press ON and D together to get into the interactive self-test mode, then press backspace to start the memory browser. You should see something starting with 705D9: at the top of the display. Press EVAL, and you should see something like: Copyright HP 1989 briefly displayed. Press EVAL again if you want another look. Press ON and C together to do a warmstart and get out of self-test mode. -- ==== I've found one of them is version E and the other is J. Curious at least. ==== I've found one of them is version E and the other is J. Curious at least. The answer to this question could be found in the HP48 FAQ at www.hpcalc.org, also lost of other usefull information about the 48 series, which is helpfull if you own a 48S and lost all manuals and documentation. By the way, where is coma mode ( [ON][SPC] on the 48) on the 49? ==== X > documentation. By the way, where is coma mode ( [ON][SPC] on the 48) > on the 49? It has been cured (-; ==== This is really a GREAT idea !! Is it also a new version of your HP-Zelda or not ? Lilian. Just a link here to announce new home page of my ZeldaHP project for HP49 > calculators. > Binaries and sources available here : http://zeldahp.jadeware.org -- > ==== > Just a link here to announce new home page of my ZeldaHP project for HP49 > calculators. > Binaries and sources available here : http://zeldahp.jadeware.org I have downloaded the binaries and installed it, but's a STRING-FILE for the HP48 Is that right? I think it's a project for HP49? Robert ==== You have the source code so you could recompile it for HP48 though.. Don't know if the HPDEV compiler is used by lot of coders.. Could someone tell me witch PC compiler is better, or most used, for MASD syntax like asm project ? Julien b847pq$6903m$1@ID-114548.news.dfncis.de... Just a link here to announce new home page of my ZeldaHP project for HP49 calculators. > Binaries and sources available here : http://zeldahp.jadeware.org > I have downloaded the binaries and installed it, but's a STRING-FILE for the HP48 Is that right? I think it's a project for HP49? ==== > You have the source code so you could recompile it for HP48 though.. Don't know if the HPDEV compiler is used by lot of coders.. > Could someone tell me witch PC compiler is better, or most used, for MASD > syntax like asm project ? I don't know if it's the best one, but have you tried Debug4x? -- PS: Of course downloadable from hpcalc. ==== I've always wondered.. Where do you get your .sig content ? GNU here stands for Guide du Neuneu de Usenet (in english, Guide for Usenet Dummy). There are other such guides. These are compilations of real expressions written by real people (or real dummies). Unix(-like) environment, just create your .signature file as a FIFO, and create a process that will always try to write one signature in the file. If noone is reading the FIFO, this process will be blocked. As soon as another process wants to read from this file, it will unblock the writer. The writer has to close the file as soon as it has finished writing to it, and wait for some time (typically 1 second is small and large enough). ==== ==== Where can I get the Advanced User Reference for the HP 48G series calculators? I found a place in Canada where I can do it, but I'll have to pay more. If you know of a DEFINATE place where I can get it, please let me -- ------------------------------- ==== Try: http://www.calcpro.com I ordered one this week, but the sales rep. wasn't so sure they actually had it in stock. He mentioned something about a shipment coming in (?) and I was in a hurry so I just placed the order and hoped for the best. You might try your luck. BTW, what's the Canadian source you found if I may ask??? ==== The Canadian Site is http://store.axidata.ca/kore/search/search.html?searchDomain=0&searchExpr=00 048-90136 and I will try it if the calcpro site doesn't work, but the Canadian site will be more expensive for an American. :-) I found http://store.axidata.ca through http://groups.google.com by clicking on the web section for google. I entered 00048-90136 as the search term. Good luck! > Try: http://www.calcpro.com I ordered one this week, but the sales rep. wasn't so sure they actually had > it in stock. He mentioned something about a shipment coming in (?) and I > was in a hurry so I just placed the order and hoped for the best. You might > try your luck. BTW, what's the Canadian source you found if I may ask??? Best, > Eduardo ==== >the sales rep. wasn't so sure they actually had >it in stock. He mentioned something about a shipment coming in (?) and I >was in a hurry so I just placed the order and hoped for the best. Sales Rep ??.... Calc Pro is just ONE guy... and he is blissfully unconcerned (or else extremely busy... like... too busy to give good service) Keep hoping for the best.... you may get it eventually.... sometime in 2005 ==== > Where can I get the Advanced User Reference for the HP 48G series > calculators? I found a place in Canada where I can do it, but I'll have to > pay more. With the exchange rate such as it is, their price must be way up there. Or maybe you can't do exchange rate currency on the net. ==== Does anyone know if there are any HP-11C's out there for sale? Either an active HP junkie or on Ebay or the like. An engineer I work with is interesting in obtaining one. _________________________________________________ ==== > Does anyone know if there are any HP-11C's out there for sale? Either an > active HP junkie or on Ebay or the like. > An engineer I work with is interesting in obtaining one. There are lots of them at ebay. But be prepared to pay more than $100 for it... ==== .... >There are lots of them at ebay. But be prepared to pay more than $100 for >it... That's amazing. I had no idea that prices were so high for those things these days. When I bought my 11C, I paid $40 for it, new, from Service Merchandise. By my math, if it's worth $100 that's a ~7% annual ROI... on a consumer electronics product! -- http://www.mschaef.com ==== > Merchandise. By my math, if it's worth $100 that's a ~7% annual ROI... on Imagine the prices (or have a frequent look at ebay) for these devices new in a box, never used. If we had known this it would have been the best investment ever in the 70/80ies. ==== What is this HP-11C that can cost 450$?? whats so special bout it? ==== > What is this HP-11C that can cost 450$?? whats so special bout it? I think what's so special about it is that the seller thinks he can get $450 for it. :-) Actually, it's possible. A HEPAX module for the HP-41 -- not the calculator itself, just a plug-in module for it -- recently sold on eBay for $610. Last year an HP-16C sold for about $700, and not long ago a 16C box -- not the calculator, just the cardboard box it came in -- went for $64. An HP-65 sold for $660 last month. Prices are getting unbelievable for the older models. (I wouldn't sell my 16C or 41CX for *any* price...) ==== > What is this HP-11C that can cost 450$?? whats so special bout it? That the seller hopes to get $450 for it? Prices for most non-RPL HP calculators have skyrocketed. No doubt some of the buyers intend to actually use them, but I expect that (especially at these prices) more of them are bought as collectors items; note that even the boxes and packing material that most of us discard are precious to some collectors. Sometimes I think that the collectors must have a lot more money than common sense, but I expect that we all have a bit of a tendency to keep things for sentimental reasons or to buy things that we'll never really use just because they're fine examples of excellent products. My calculators, for example, I intend to keep, even though I actually use mostly the 48GX, 48SX, and 49G. It may well be that even more of the older HP calculators are being bought by speculators, hoping to make a big profit when they resell them. I very much hope that this is merely a price bubble, and that the speculators will end up selling at a substantial loss. But it seems that the supply of an out-of-production item will inevitably decrease, so unless the demand decreases similarly, we can expect the market price to increase. The collectors seem to have a tendency to blame the sellers for unreasonably high prices, but I think that any blame more properly falls on those who pay such prices. I'm a bit surprised that the prices for used 28 series, 48 series, and 49G calculators haven't gone up nearly as much. It might be wise to buy a spare or two now, just in case anything ever happens to your working calculator. If it turns out that you never need a spare, then someday you might sell it to supplement your retirement income, or pass it on to your heirs as a treasured heirloom, or as a valuable item to be sold, as they see fit. But of course I do hope to someday be able to purchase an improved RPL calculator with even more bells and whistles to use (or perhaps more likely, to play with), an HP 50GX or an RPL model from some other company. -- ==== Recently, it seems that prices of HP-48SX models have gone up a notch (to around $50 from a low of $20). Maybe this is the beginning of the same for that line? -- * These statements and opinions are mine alone and do not reflect my employer's views. * > I'm a bit surprised that the prices for used 28 series, 48 series, and > 49G calculators haven't gone up nearly as much. > ==== > Recently, it seems that prices of HP-48SX models have gone up a notch (to > around $50 from a low of $20). That's my impression too, and I think that there's been an increase in 28 series prices as well. But I haven't really tracked the prices carefully. Whether the increase is due to a demand for spare or replacment calculators, for collector's items, or speculation, I don't know; I expect that it's a combination of all of these. > Maybe this is the beginning of the same for > that line? It may well be. If you want one of these, you might be well advised to buy one soon, while the prices are still well below the original new equipment prices. ==== >Recently, it seems that prices of HP-48SX models have gone up a notch (to >around $50 from a low of $20). Maybe this is the beginning of the same for >that line? >-- >* These statements and opinions are mine alone and do not reflect my >employer's views. * I'm a bit surprised that the prices for used 28 series, 48 series, and > 49G calculators haven't gone up nearly as much. > FWIW the HP-12Cs seem to have dropped a little over the last month or two. Were going regularly for $40-$50 now $30-$40. -- To the engineers who developed and produced the fine line of HP calculating machines. HP calculators have incalculably lead to real world improvements in prosperity and expanded knowledge for all who utilize them, and even those who have not. I recall the joy of learning more about math and programming with my first HP calc the HP25. Today, the HP49G expands on this experience with truely amazing features. HP calculator engineers, you have positively touch many lives. Your work is a wonderful example of the noble profession of engineering. ==== > HP calculator engineers, you have positively touch many lives. Your work is a > wonderful example of the noble profession of engineering. give it some rest now friend! I agree with a couple I assure you that there is nothing noble about engineering! Only college students speak like that with no real life experience in a corporate environment ;-) ==== Not many years in the corporate environ? Guess you esp needs a tune up, 26 years at many large corps. Yes, I know, the politics, bean counting, beauracracy, etc is bad. But, when a fine product roles out inspite of it all, who is really resposible? The engineers! Without engineers, were would civilization be? ==== > I assure you that there is nothing noble about > engineering! Only college students speak like that with > no real life experience in a corporate environment ;-) No matter where you work and what you do. You will always get a better job if it's done by people who like what they are doing... ==== Finally getting around to convert some USER RPL programs for my HP49. I have two books, The Gray Book {Donnelly} and Programming in System RPL by Eduardo de Mattos Kalinowski. Both are good, the later is really good. And yet I am not sure how to exactly convert. 2: real 1: real IF == THEN DROP 21. ELSE 21 + END I am thinking is should be: example: LAM x1 LAM x2 EQUAL IT :: DROP %21 ; ITE :: %21 %+ ; I am using ASM2 on the HP49G with ROM 1.19-6. Is this close? Also, I noticed that if I place ASM2 source as described by Mr. Kalinowski. shows syntax errors in debuger4x, why are the file syntaxes different? Can debuger4x be set to look at ASM2 sources? ==== The answer is: ITE takes a flag from level one. The flag is dropped. If TRUE, it evaluates the next object in runstream and skips the second one. If FALSE. skips the next object and evaluates the second one. In both cases, the program execution is resumed after the second object. So, in your example: EQUAL ITE :: DROP %21 ; :: %21 + ; Assuming that there are three reals on the stack: two of them are compared and the other (on level three) is either dropped and replaced by 21 if real1=real2 or added to 21 if real1=!real2. Kevin Finally getting around to convert some USER RPL > programs for my HP49. I have two books, The Gray Book {Donnelly} and > Programming in System RPL by Eduardo de Mattos Kalinowski. Both are good, the later is really good. And yet I am not sure how to exactly convert. 2: real > 1: real > IF == THEN DROP 21. ELSE 21 + END I am thinking is should be: example: LAM x1 > LAM x2 > EQUAL > IT :: DROP %21 ; > ITE :: %21 %+ ; I am using ASM2 on the HP49G with ROM 1.19-6. Is this close? Also, I noticed that if I place ASM2 source as > described by Mr. Kalinowski. shows syntax > errors in debuger4x, why are the file syntaxes > different? Can debuger4x be set to look at > ASM2 sources? > ==== I think you ought to stick with the 48gx. I have the 49g and 48gx and I really like the 48. The 49g comes with a very small man. but packed with memory. ==== > Specifically... they would like to know how to OPEN their 49G calc SAFELY and > with NO DAMAGE You can't open an HP calculators without doing any visible damage. With some experience you can minimize them, but it will always show that the calculator had been opened. ==== Specifically... they would like to know how to OPEN their 49G calc SAFELY and > with NO DAMAGE You can't open an HP calculators without doing any visible damage. With some > experience you can minimize them, but it will always show that the > calculator had been opened. > I don't remember where I saw it, but I thought I saw a document on how to open the HP-49G. I didn't pay too much attention to it though. It required drilling out the little blue plastic clips in the battery compartment, which is definitely something I would consider destructive. I don't know how to keep it closed after doing this. Does anyone remember this document? I looked yesterday, and all I could find was instructions on opening the HP-48. Maybe that's what I saw before. Like I said, I didn't pay much attention to it. --CS ==== I have already drilled on Chinese model with a hand drill. The capacitor is changed and it works now alright! I just put some epoxy into the holes when I closed it. It may not be necessary... Afterwards I got hold on this one: http://www.geocities.com/deachp/duda8.html PS: Opening the 48: http://www.hpcalc.org/hp48/docs/opening/ Specifically... they would like to know how to OPEN their 49G calc SAFELY and > with NO DAMAGE You can't open an HP calculators without doing any visible damage. With some > experience you can minimize them, but it will always show that the > calculator had been opened. > I don't remember where I saw it, but I thought I saw a document on how > to open the HP-49G. I didn't pay too much attention to it though. It > required drilling out the little blue plastic clips in the battery > compartment, which is definitely something I would consider > destructive. I don't know how to keep it closed after doing this. Does anyone remember this document? I looked yesterday, and all I > could find was instructions on opening the HP-48. Maybe that's what I > saw before. Like I said, I didn't pay much attention to it. --CS ==== For OPEN the HP-49G, please see: http://www.geocities.com/deachp/duda8.html This is a explained steps in Spanish Language. Miguel Angel CAPORALINI HERK (M.A.C.H.) **************************************************************************** **** Specifically... they would like to know how to OPEN their 49G calc SAFELY and > with NO DAMAGE You can't open an HP calculators without doing any visible damage. With some > experience you can minimize them, but it will always show that the > calculator had been opened. > ==== I opened near of 30 hp49g, begin to drilling subtle the 6 smalls plastic rivets from battery compartment, after move the positive contact it is easy to be opened (only with your hands). And there isn't any superficial trace or NO visible damage. JoGa > You can't open an HP calculators without doing any visible damage. With some > experience you can minimize them, but it will always show that the > calculator had been opened. > ==== BUT [NXT] TIME when the owner changes the batteries (s)he will see the drillet rivets filled (or not) with your stuff instead of the HP original. PS: Nice unshaky hands you have, you should see my handwork! I opened near of 30 hp49g, begin to drilling subtle the 6 smalls > plastic rivets from battery compartment, after move the positive > contact it is easy to be opened (only with your hands). And there > isn't any superficial trace or NO visible damage. JoGa > You can't open an HP calculators without doing any visible damage. With some > experience you can minimize them, but it will always show that the > calculator had been opened. > ==== >You can't open an HP calculators without doing any visible damage. I suppose HP believes they last forever.....forever may be too strong a word BUT... I have calculators here... dating back to the seventies.... and working perfectly. I have always been told.... pocket calculator failure is VERY exceptional.... and even more unlikely if there is no AC adapter. Battery leakage or physical damage is about the only thing that takes them out. ==== I had been using HP calculators for a long time, but then took a long break. Now I want to get back in using my HP48GX. Went to www.calculatingedge.com and landed on a hard core porn site - so I guess Calculating Edge has gone kaput. My attempt to connect with HP's info place at hpcvbbs.external.hp.com/hp48g.html failed, so I suppose HP has closed that down. Did discover that CalcPro is still alive, but I couldn't get it to run its search option. Are there other places that handle HP calculators and accessories, like manuals. What I am looking for is the 'HP48G/GX Advanced User's Reference.' Want to do some programing using labeled units. Anyone know whether that book is around somewhere. ==== this is a good site http://www.samsoncables.com/catalog/index.cfm you may want to look at the HP49G! ($170.00) > I had been using HP calculators for a long time, but then took a long > break. Now I want to get back in using my HP48GX. Went to > www.calculatingedge.com and landed on a hard core porn site - so I > guess Calculating Edge has gone kaput. My attempt to connect with HP's > info place at hpcvbbs.external.hp.com/hp48g.html failed, so I suppose > HP has closed that down. Did discover that CalcPro is still alive, but > I couldn't get it to run its search option. Are there other places > that handle HP calculators and accessories, like manuals. What I am looking for is the 'HP48G/GX Advanced User's Reference.' > Want to do some programing using labeled units. Anyone know whether > that book is around somewhere. > ==== this is a good site http://www.samsoncables.com/catalog/index.cfm you may want to look at the HP49G! ($170.00) But Samson Cables doesn't currently have the AUR listed. Keep checking, he often has used items for sale. Note that CalcPro prices (for presumably new items) is often lower that Samson Cable's prices for used items. But CalcPro's web site seems to be out of order right now; he seems to have a lot of problems with it. -- ==== this is a good site http://www.samsoncables.com/catalog/index.cfm you may want to look at the HP49G! ($170.00) But Samson Cables doesn't currently have the AUR listed. Keep checking, > he often has used items for sale. Note that CalcPro prices (for presumably new items) is often lower that > Samson Cable's prices for used items. But CalcPro's web site seems to be > out of order right now; he seems to have a lot of problems with it. I was able to connect yesterday - the home page has a 'we're back msg.' I was able to download the catalog; my quick look see's it as unchanged from three years ago. ==== Would both programs FEM48 v5.3 and VigaG v4.1b fit in the memory of a HP-48G+ (128kb)? Would the memory be sufficient? ==== 128KB? Yes, I think so. FEM max 52KB VigaG 24KB Sum max = 76KB + some data You will have more than 32KB left Would both programs FEM48 v5.3 and VigaG v4.1b fit in the memory of a > HP-48G+ (128kb)? Would the memory be sufficient? > > ==== The size of FEM48 depends on the modules you install, and if you use standard or compressed modules (as can be read in section 13.2 of the manual). The sizes quoted are for the compressed modules. Minimum size is 22586.5 bytes (FEM48 module), which gives you only basic features like FEA (only data at nodes), structure plots and file management. To do beam analysis you also need the QUERY module, at 12896 bytes. This yields a total of 35482.5 bytes. Note that other modules might come in handy too (load cases, wizards, pretty print output, moving loads)... Maximum size of FEM48, with all modules installed is either 58582 bytes (all modules compressed) or 73164 bytes (all modules standard = fastest). Note that the memory requirements (section 11.1 of manual) of FEM48 are: bytes needed = 79 x (nodes)^2 (good guesstimate) Caspar FRANCK <.franck@skynet.be> schreef in bericht Would both programs FEM48 v5.3 and VigaG v4.1b fit in the memory of a > HP-48G+ (128kb)? Would the memory be sufficient? > > ==== What solvents can be used for removing grease of calculator keyboards without doing damage? ==== Soapwater moistured non-rubbing clean cloth, (I use an old frotee sock) What solvents can be used for removing grease of calculator keyboards > without doing damage? > > ==== > Soapwater moistured non-rubbing clean cloth, > (I use an old frotee sock) A psychological tactic? (scare the grease away) Greetings Steve Sousa ==== > Soapwater moistured non-rubbing clean cloth, > (I use an old frotee sock) A psychological tactic? (scare the grease away) AND if that doesn't work, you could use XO Cognac instead of soap The combination with and old sock with certainly get the grease away like greased lightning. PS: *don't use too much moisture* OR if you insist (Steve?) then lay on your back and hold the calculatrice above your face while cleaning so that water doesn't penetrade the innards of the HP. ==== There has been much discussion, argument and speculation as to the future of the HP49G. Here is an additional datapoint :-). Note that I'm not trying to start a flamewar here - just thought I'd provide info to people in a similar position. I bought an HP49G about a year ago, and recently sent it back for a warranty replacement (had trouble switching it on). HP has had my calculator for well over a month now (sent it to them on 17/03/03, now it's 25/04/03). I've called them twice about it. Each time they have told me that they are waiting on supplies of HP49G calculators, and have given me a future arrival date. The latest one is May 5th. The chap I've been talking to (Graham Frasier) has told me the following: -> The lack of HP49G calculators is due to a a component shortage. -> Very few calculators have been returned with the doesn't switch on problem. The whole capacitor failure story is wrong, and comes from uninformed sources [I don't think I'm willing to believe this!]. -> He'd also be annoyed if someone took away his calculator for over a month, but there's nothing he can do about it. -> He would investigate the possiblity of HP giving me my money back instead. He said that they are changing the way they do things, and that he'd have to find out how to go about this. All in all, a pretty poor effort from HP. It's bitterly disappointing to see them end up this way. If I can get my money back, I will buy a 48GX instead (the keys on my 32sII are MUCH nicer than the hp49 keys). Take care! Alan ==== I have to agree with you on all your points. Pretty shoddy treatment in my estimation. I too hate to see HP end up this way. Fortunately my 48GX continues to work fine, as does my 28S. I hope they continue to do so as your report of HP's service does not bode well. Good luck! Rod There has been much discussion, argument and speculation as to the > future of the HP49G. Here is an additional datapoint :-). Note that I'm > not trying to start a flamewar here - just thought I'd provide info to > people in a similar position. I bought an HP49G about a year ago, and recently sent it back for a > warranty replacement (had trouble switching it on). HP has had my > calculator for well over a month now (sent it to them on 17/03/03, now > it's 25/04/03). I've called them twice about it. Each time they have told me that they > are waiting on supplies of HP49G calculators, and have given me a future > arrival date. The latest one is May 5th. The chap I've been talking to (Graham Frasier) has told me the following: -> The lack of HP49G calculators is due to a a component shortage. -> Very few calculators have been returned with the doesn't switch on > problem. The whole capacitor failure story is wrong, and comes from > uninformed sources [I don't think I'm willing to believe this!]. -> He'd also be annoyed if someone took away his calculator for over a > month, but there's nothing he can do about it. -> He would investigate the possiblity of HP giving me my money back > instead. He said that they are changing the way they do things, and > that he'd have to find out how to go about this. All in all, a pretty poor effort from HP. It's bitterly disappointing to > see them end up this way. If I can get my money back, I will buy a > 48GX instead (the keys on my 32sII are MUCH nicer than the hp49 keys). Take care! Alan ==== The HP49 is still sold (apparently) in Australia by Harris Technology. Check http://hpstore.ht.com.au/Scripts/xworks.exe?XwsSrvID=H,CAT:HHV#Tof As of 25th April they are on 28 day order. Since they have been discontinued in the US for some time now, it seems unreasonable that Australia should have any privilege in being the only country where the HP49 will remain available. Whether HP resellers get their stock on back order is a good question. Replacement warranty is only worthwhile if the wholesalers and repairers have sufficient stocks, which doesn't seem to be the case in your situation. HP are dropping their calculator range like hot bricks. In normal circumstances one would expect a product range overlap rather than extended gaps between succesive rations of calculators. Of course HP would yell out from their parapet if component suppliers have gone belly up. Maybe the team which is responsible for http://www.hp-calculators.com/index.phtml are probably scurrying around to find manufacturers of clone calculators which HP can re-badge. To design an HP48/49 type successor from scratch seems like a tall story after the shutdown of the ACO, especially one with an RPN/RPL operating system with different connectivity options. The HP49 had an excellent engine inside a lousy body. It seems that developers of the excellent software and firmware for the HP49 calculators have not been matched by the manufacturers. Outsourcing has reached ridiculous levels of absurdity. Outsourcing means that the users of calculators are kept further apart from the designers and manufacturers. If I were you I'd get an HP48GX before the undertaker takes them away. The Klotz RAM cards are terrific if you want the same (or more) memory and expandability as the HP49G. Richard (in Canberra) There has been much discussion, argument and speculation as to the > future of the HP49G. Here is an additional datapoint :-). Note that I'm > not trying to start a flamewar here - just thought I'd provide info to > people in a similar position. I bought an HP49G about a year ago, and recently sent it back for a > warranty replacement (had trouble switching it on). HP has had my > calculator for well over a month now (sent it to them on 17/03/03, now > it's 25/04/03). I've called them twice about it. Each time they have told me that they > are waiting on supplies of HP49G calculators, and have given me a future > arrival date. The latest one is May 5th. The chap I've been talking to (Graham Frasier) has told me the following: -> The lack of HP49G calculators is due to a a component shortage. -> Very few calculators have been returned with the doesn't switch on > problem. The whole capacitor failure story is wrong, and comes from > uninformed sources [I don't think I'm willing to believe this!]. -> He'd also be annoyed if someone took away his calculator for over a > month, but there's nothing he can do about it. -> He would investigate the possiblity of HP giving me my money back > instead. He said that they are changing the way they do things, and > that he'd have to find out how to go about this. All in all, a pretty poor effort from HP. It's bitterly disappointing to > see them end up this way. If I can get my money back, I will buy a > 48GX instead (the keys on my 32sII are MUCH nicer than the hp49 keys). Take care! Alan ==== > A directory CASDIR, was placed under the HOME directory but when trying to > remove CASDIR it will not remove per the instructions in the user manual. > on my other HP 49Gs. I tried reloading 1:19-5 but the CASDIR was not > removed. thx > CASDIR is a reserved variable in the HP49G from ROM 1.19-5. You can remove it, but it will be re-created almost instantly (the Main Stack display when trying to access VX will recreate the directory) You can re-order your HOME directory so CASDIR will be the last object and you won't have to worry about it. ==== > CASDIR is a reserved variable in the HP49G from ROM 1.19-5. You can > remove it, but it will be re-created almost instantly (the Main > Stack display when trying to access VX will recreate the directory) > You can re-order your HOME directory so CASDIR will be the last > object and you won't have to worry about it. With my Filer2 (for instance) you may even hide the CASDIR. Hence, it disappears from the VAR menu. It remains active. For instance, if 'z' is stored in its variable VX, 'z' is displayed in the Header instead of 'X'. One has still direct access to all variables in CASDIR via Filer2, not using the HP49 CAS. - Wolfgang ==== > not using the HP49 CAS. I thought the whole point of using an HP49G was for the CAS. -- Bhuvanesh ==== not using the HP49 CAS. I thought the whole point of using an HP49G was for the CAS. It's a nice add-on, but I use it primarily for numerics. The equation solver is nice, and Sune Bredahl's simultaneous equation solver is even nicer. It is sometimes useful to see symbolic results for integrals and derivatives, but it's not part of my everyday-life. The 3d graphing helps me in modelling. ==== > I thought the whole point of using an HP49G was for the CAS. It's a nice add-on, but I use it primarily for numerics. The equation > solver is nice, and Sune Bredahl's simultaneous equation solver is even > nicer. It is sometimes useful to see symbolic results for integrals and > derivatives, but it's not part of my everyday-life. The 3d graphing helps me in modelling. In that case, wouldn't you be better off using an HP48GX? -- Bhuvanesh ==== > It's a nice add-on, but I use it primarily for numerics. The equation > solver is nice, and Sune Bredahl's simultaneous equation solver is even > nicer. It is sometimes useful to see symbolic results for integrals and > derivatives, but it's not part of my everyday-life. The 3d graphing helps me in modelling. In that case, wouldn't you be better off using an HP48GX? Yes, but apart from the better keyboard and hardware build, I can't find anything much better. The flashrom sounded promising, and I _did_ want to try out the CAS. With the 48GX I'd have to get memory cards and other gadgets to enable the same functionality of a 49g. So, I decided to get the 49, especially since it was priced cheaper than a 48gx and I was told that they were discontinued. In any case, there's no reason to switch to a 48GX (apart from keyboard) for me, the 49g can do anything a 48 can. I do wish I had one, though, at times when certain applications are made only for the 48GX. ==== > In that case, wouldn't you be better off using an HP48GX? Why? The 49G has the same capabilities has the 48GX and you get 1.5MB of RAM/flash ==== > Why? The 49G has the same capabilities has the 48GX and you get 1.5MB of > RAM/flash Really? I can't find the card slot in my 49G. :-) ==== > Why? The 49G has the same capabilities has the 48GX and you get 1.5MB of > RAM/flash Really? I can't find the card slot in my 49G. :-) They fill it in at the factory with that 1.5MB RAM card and then seal the slot to puzzle twits like you. ==== > Really? I can't find the card slot in my 49G. :-) And why would you need it in a HP49G? It's all in there. No need for additional RAM card to get erable/alg48/metakernel running ==== > Really? I can't find the card slot in my 49G. :-) > And why would you need it in a HP49G? It's all in there. No need for > additional RAM card to get erable/alg48/metakernel running For my EE and Surveying cards. That's OK, I'll just keep using the 48GX for those. ==== > Why? The 49G has the same capabilities has the 48GX and you get 1.5MB of > RAM/flash Really? I can't find the card slot in my 49G. :-) And the IR I/O doesn't work! -- ==== I downloaded the remote control program. I have got it to work with our sony tv, mitsubishi tv, and JCB vcr. I have a sony DSS system,a Sanyo tv, and a magnovox tv that I could not find. Does anyone have these remotes? ==== I figured out the tv. Now I just need the DSS sytem. ==== Has anyone tried using the ECLIB library for the 49G by Mauro Chiri? (library 1001.) It depends on bzip (BZ49LIB #1770) so I installed it first, but once I run ECLIB I get an Undefined XLIB name error right when I choose any equation from the program's menu. I also have EQNLIB (library 999) but I don't think it's quite as nice as the 48GX eq'n library and was wondering if ECLIB is any better but of course if it ain't run, it ain't better. Eduardo ==== > Has anyone tried using the ECLIB library for the 49G by Mauro Chiri? > (library 1001.) It depends on bzip (BZ49LIB #1770) so I installed it first, > but once I run ECLIB I get an Undefined XLIB name error right when I > choose any equation from the program's menu. I also have EQNLIB (library 999) but I don't think it's quite as nice as the > 48GX eq'n library and was wondering if ECLIB is any better but of course if > it ain't run, it ain't better. > Eduardo I had the same problem. That is the wrong bzip. Try this one. -> 1788 * Bz+49 :v1.1 hp49/utils/compress/bzcomp49v11.zip:BzComp49v11.lib http://www.hpcalc.org/search.php?query=bzcomp49 Jorge Gonzalez ==== > I had the same problem. That is the wrong bzip. > Try this one. -> 1788 * Bz+49 :v1.1 > hp49/utils/compress/bzcomp49v11.zip:BzComp49v11.lib http://www.hpcalc.org/search.php?query=bzcomp49 Jorge Gonzalez ==== > I also have EQNLIB (library 999) but I don't think it's quite as nice as the > 48GX eq'n library and was wondering if ECLIB is any better but of course if > it ain't run, it ain't better. So now that you have it working, is it any better? ==== I have to admit I like EQLIB better, but it is an empowering feeling to have both of them at hand :-) Also, the BZIP library I installed by your > I also have EQNLIB (library 999) but I don't think it's quite as nice as > the > 48GX eq'n library and was wondering if ECLIB is any better but of course > if > it ain't run, it ain't better. So now that you have it working, is it any better? ==== Today I noticed I had to slow PC keyboard input or it would drop characters. Is there a way around this? Also, is there, or will there be newer rom version (than 1.18) available? ==== I'm using 1.30 and there could be something newer. Check the web page! http://privat.swol.de/ChristophGiesselink/emu48.htm Look's like 1.30 is the latest. Try it out and see if it fixes your problem Rod > Today I noticed I had to slow PC keyboard input or it would drop characters. Is there a way around this? Also, is there, or will there be newer rom version (than 1.18) available? ==== > I'm using 1.30 and there could be something newer. I use 1.32 from some time ago... ==== > I'm using 1.30 and there could be something newer. I use 1.32 from some time ago... > Sorry, I meant the HP 49 ROM image was 1.18, the emulator is 1.32. FWIW I am using it under XP. I don't recall this happening with an older version of EMU 48 and using it as a HP 48. ==== Where can I find an hp49g emulator? ==== LwOdnf-Le8bKJDWjXTWcrg@giganews.com... > Where can I find an hp49g emulator? You can find almost all hp4x-related software on hpcalc.org : http://www.hpcalc.org/hp48/pc/emulators/emu48-1.30.zip -- Khanh-Dang ==== Ziege schrieb im Newsbeitrag > Where can I find an hp49g emulator? Search for debug4 or for emu48 (forty-eight!) at www.hpcalc.org ..Heiko ==== I have the Emu48 program and the hp49g-1.18.flash file. How can I get Emu48 emulating an HP-49g? ==== With emu48 I prefer the 640x480 side by side rendition of the the HP48 (screen on left, most of the keys on the right. This works very well for 800x600 too. With the hp49 emulator (the one accessed on the Zelda page), it doesn't fit on a 800x600 screen. Is there something similar to the 640x480 side by side screen for the HP49 emulator? ==== Is there something similar to the 640x480 side by side screen for > the HP49 emulator? Yes, they are all the same emulator with different KML (the Emu48 skins). Just copy the KML and the bitmap you like in your emu48 directory ==== Some years ago I created a KML script for the EMU48.EXE to emulate a 38G with a screen that is twice as big as normal and has the keyboard on the right of the screen. You'd have to redo the image of the keyboard and the key mappings obviously but it's really not hard. If you want to see how mine works just download it from http://www.hphomeview.com/utilities.htm > >Is there something similar to the 640x480 side by side screen for >the HP49 emulator? Yes, they are all the same emulator with different KML (the Emu48 skins). > Just copy the KML and the bitmap you like in your emu48 directory > ==== > e639cb5b.0304221051.7e096f84@posting.google.com, > Is there something similar to the 640x480 side by side screen for > the HP49 emulator? > Yes, they are all the same emulator with different KML (the Emu48 skins). > Just copy the KML and the bitmap you like in your emu48 directory > Sorry, that isn't correct, the HP49 emulator mentioned on the Zelda page points to http://www.hpcalc.org/hp49/pc/emulators/calc.exe and that is the YorkeM emulator. the latest version v1.32) with HP49 KML scripts. You must get the ROM image for example from the YorkeM emulator. The www.hpcalc.org HP49 emulator section is full of HP49 KML script packages. Copy them into your Emu48 directory. The one at http://www.hpcalc.org/hp49/pc/emulators/spec49g.zip has a horizontal design and should fit on a 800x600 screen, but there are many others, which also fit on this screen size. For 640x480 resolution you have perhaps make one for yourself. Christoph ==== > Sorry, that isn't correct, the HP49 emulator mentioned on the Zelda page > points to http://www.hpcalc.org/hp49/pc/emulators/calc.exe and that is the > YorkeM emulator. the latest version v1.32) with HP49 KML scripts. You must get the ROM image > for example from the YorkeM emulator. The www.hpcalc.org HP49 emulator > section is full of HP49 KML script packages. Copy them into your Emu48 > directory. The one at http://www.hpcalc.org/hp49/pc/emulators/spec49g.zip > has a horizontal design and should fit on a 800x600 screen, but there are > many others, which also fit on this screen size. For 640x480 resolution you > have perhaps make one for yourself. Christoph Ok, I must be doing someting wrong. I got the rom.e49, copied as rom.49g, downloaded emu48 1.30, applied 1.32 patch, got a few 49 klm scripts, unzipped them to the emu48 dirctory. I see, under view all the usual 48 klm scripts, but no 49 scripts. btw, emu48 is terrific. ==== emu48.ini file and that allowed the 49 skins to appear. Kewl, that will work! ==== 662e00ed.0304210440.5907cb22@posting.google.com, Bhuvanesh > Did Erable support algebraic notation? I thought that came with the HP49G. > Of course it does. There's no real algebraic notation on the HP48 (or HP49). It's all in RPN, just the display make the user believe it's in algebraic. On the HP48 you can directly enter algebraic expression by using the ' (quote). Like '3*X+2' will be stored as: 3 X * 2 + I know a few of you have TI-89 as well as HP48 and 49 Well I just got my TI-89 a few days ago.... adding to my stock of HP's and other calcs.... I guess now I am a confirmed calculator freak, bona fide and getting worse... anyway, on page 8 and 9 of the TI-89 manual is the following example: Graph the function (abs(X^2 - 3) - 10) / 2 and find the value of the minimum in the fourth quadrant The calculator gives ( 1.7320508075707 - 4.9999999999969 ) but the picture in the book on page 9... clearly shows the screen shot as.... ( 1.7320508075682 - 4.9999.......... (it scrolls off the screen) All my HP's only go to 12 digits.... and they give ( 1.73205080756 - 4.99999999998 ) Can somebody with a TI-89 do the problem and tell me what they get ????? or... those with a long-float library... or Mathcad... tell me what the last digits should be ???? SM ==== > I know a few of you have TI-89 as well as HP48 and 49 I have an emulator... it just might survive longer than the real thing. > Well I just got my TI-89 a few days ago.... adding to my stock of HP's and > other calcs.... I guess now I am a confirmed calculator freak, bona fide and > getting worse... Welcome to the club! :-) > Can somebody with a TI-89 do the problem and tell me what they get ????? or... those with a long-float library... or Mathcad... tell me what the last > digits should be ???? You can easily get the exact result on the TI-68k using fMin(expression,x): fMin((abs(x^2-3)-10)/2,x)|x>=0 -- Bhuvanesh ==== > anyway, on page 8 and 9 of the TI-89 manual is the following example: Graph the function (abs(X^2 - 3) - 10) / 2 and find the value of the minimum in the fourth quadrant The calculator gives ( 1.7320508075707 - 4.9999999999969 ) but the picture in the book on page 9... clearly shows the screen shot as.... ( 1.7320508075682 - 4.9999.......... (it scrolls off the screen) With a HW2 TI-89 running AMS 2.08, I get: ( 1.7320508075704 - 4.9999999999974 ) It's not an error in the manual but a different ROM revision. Tom Lake ==== > You can easily get the exact result on the TI-68k using fMin(expression,x): fMin((abs(x^2-3)-10)/2,x)|x>=0 How come if you solve sign(x^2 - 3)*x [the derivative of the above function] for x, the Ti89 gives me x=0 while the HP49 gives me x=0, x=sqrt(3), and x=-sqrt(3)? Can the Ti89 not solve very well with 'sign' in the equation? ==== > You can easily get the exact result on the TI-68k using > fMin(expression,x): fMin((abs(x^2-3)-10)/2,x)|x>=0 How come if you solve sign(x^2 - 3)*x [the derivative of the above function] > for x, the Ti89 gives me x=0 while the HP49 gives me x=0, x=sqrt(3), and > x=-sqrt(3)? On the 89 fMin((abs(x^2-3)-10)/2,x) will give +sqrt(3) and -sqrt(3), if you throw in the constraint of x>=0 then you only get the positive value. On the 89 the sign() functions is defined as following: sign(positive) = 1 sign(0) = +-1 sign(negative) = -1. >Can the Ti89 not solve very well with 'sign' in the equation? Solving sign(x^2 - 3)*x =0, for x can only give one solution x=0, as the sign() function will never be 0. A simple graph of the origional function (abs(x^2-3)-10)/2 shows that at +-sqrt(3) the graph is pointy. Taking righthanded and left handed limits of the derivative as x goes to sqrt(3) gives two different results. So I ask you Can the hp49g not solve very well with 'sign' in the equation? -The one and only Cheerio: Samuel S www.calvin.edu/~sstear70 ==== > How come if you solve sign(x^2 - 3)*x [the derivative of the above function] > for x, the Ti89 gives me x=0 while the HP49 gives me x=0, x=sqrt(3), and > x=-sqrt(3)? Can the Ti89 not solve very well with 'sign' in the equation? Yep, that's interesting. I'll report it as a bug (or you can if you prefer). It's because sign(0) is not zero on the TI-68k. Here's a workaround: Define sign2(xx)=when(xx=0,0,sign(xx),sign(xx)) solve(csolve(sign2(x^2-3)*x=0,x),x) Bhuvanesh. ==== > On the 89 fMin((abs(x^2-3)-10)/2,x) will give +sqrt(3) and -sqrt(3), > if you throw in the constraint of x>=0 then you only get the positive > value. On the 89 the sign() functions is defined as following: sign(positive) = 1 > sign(0) = +-1 > sign(negative) = -1. In Auto mode on an 89 with HW2 and AMS 2.08, I get sign(0) = sign(0) and sign(0.) = sign(0.). It's never 0 or +-1 Tom Lake ==== > In Auto mode on an 89 with HW2 and AMS 2.08, I get sign(0) = sign(0) and > sign(0.) = sign(0.). It's never 0 or +-1 It would return +/-1 if you were in Real mode. In Complex mode, sign(0) represents the unit circle. -- Bhuvanesh ==== > On the 89 the sign() functions is defined as following: sign(positive) = 1 > sign(0) = +-1 > sign(negative) = -1. On the Hp49, sign(x) evaluates to x / |x| or x/abs(x) if you will. > Solving sign(x^2 - 3)*x =0, for x can only give one solution x=0, as > the sign() function will never be 0. A simple graph of the origional > function (abs(x^2-3)-10)/2 shows that at +-sqrt(3) the graph is > pointy. Taking righthanded and left handed limits of the derivative as x goes > to sqrt(3) gives two different results. Yes, but it still looks like the graph of the derivative has valid roots at +-sqrt(3) and 0. In a Ti89 the sign() function can never be zero, but how come when I run it through Maple or other math software, it gives the same solution as the Hp49? For example, solving signum(x^2-3)*x for x in Maple 8 gives {x = 0}, {x = 3^(1/2)}, {x = -3^(1/2)}. So, which is the correct answer? The limits from both sides are different, but the solutions the HP49 gives are the minimums of the original function. Using the same methods as you would by hand, the HP49 gives the solutions. The sign() convention of derive/ti-68k is different from both maple and the hp49. Ti89: sign(0) = +-1 Maple 8: sign(0) = 0 Hp49: sign(0) = ? Which is right? Albert ==== X > Yes, but it still looks like the graph of the derivative has valid roots at > +-sqrt(3) and 0. In a Ti89 the sign() function can never be zero, but how > come when I run it through Maple or other math software, it gives the same > solution as the Hp49? For example, solving signum(x^2-3)*x for x in Maple 8 gives {x = 0}, {x = > 3^(1/2)}, {x = -3^(1/2)}. So, which is the correct answer? The limits from both sides are different, > but the solutions the HP49 gives are the minimums of the original function. > Using the same methods as you would by hand, the HP49 gives the solutions. The sign() convention of derive/ti-68k is different from both maple and the > hp49. Ti89: sign(0) = +-1 > Maple 8: sign(0) = 0 > Hp49: sign(0) = ? Which is right? Wolfgang may have an opinion... ==== > The sign() convention of derive/ti-68k is different from both > maple and the hp49. > Ti89: sign(0) = +-1 > Maple 8: sign(0) = 0 > Hp49: sign(0) = ? > Which is right? > Wolfgang may have an opinion... The signum function is originally defined for reals only. Any expansion to other objects, be it complex numbers or zints or algebraics or matrices is not normed. Hence, the author of a tool using an expanded signum function should clearly say in his docus how his system handles the expansion. This holds in particular for computer algebraic systems. The question which is the right one is as meaningless as the question Is 0^0 = 0 or 0^0 = 1 ? - Wolfgang ==== > Ti89: sign(0) = +-1 > Maple 8: sign(0) = 0 > Hp49: sign(0) = ? You missed one for the HP49: SIGN(0) = ?, but, to be compatible with the HP48 series, SIGN(0.) = 0. ==== I partly agree with your judgement about the sign function. If you want a definition for sgn(z) for all complex z<>0 that makes any mathematical sense at all, it better be z/abs(z). I doubt anyone ever has used an extension of the usual sgn(x) for x<>0 and real which isn't this. On the other hand, what sgn(0) is should be well documented since it isn't standard, if even you want to think of it as defined. About the 0^0 question, it is undetermined in the strictest sense but there are very good reasons to make 0^0=1. There's some discussion about this in chapter 1 of Knuth's Art of Computer Programming and, recalling from memory, he presents these arguments: (i) 0^0=1 if the binomial theorem '(a+b)^n == SIGMA(k,0,n,COMB(n,k)*a^(n-k)*b^k)' is to hold when a or b =0. (ii) If 'LIMIT(F(Z),Z=W)==0' AND 'LIMIT(G(Z),Z=W)==0' where F(Z) & G(Z) are *analytic* functions of Z (infinitely differentiable isn't sufficient) near W, then 'LIMIT(F(Z)^G(Z),Z=W)==1' (I think this was proven in some old book.) Nowadays I tend to be annoyed when a calculator complains if I ask it to compute 0^0. (I have yet to see a calculator that makes 0^0 anything other than 1, but I'm sure there must be some out there that give the value of 0^0=0). Eduardo > The signum function is originally defined for reals only. Any expansion > to other objects, be it complex numbers or zints or algebraics or > matrices is not normed. Hence, the author of a tool using an expanded > signum function should clearly say in his docus > how his system handles the expansion. This holds in particular for > computer algebraic systems. The question which is the right one is > as meaningless as the question Is 0^0 = 0 or 0^0 = 1 ? - Wolfgang ==== > (ii) If 'LIMIT(F(Z),Z=W)==0' AND 'LIMIT(G(Z),Z=W)==0' where F(Z) & G(Z) are > *analytic* functions of Z (infinitely differentiable isn't sufficient) near > W, then 'LIMIT(F(Z)^G(Z),Z=W)==1' (I think this was proven in some old > book.) I should be more precise. IF the limit of F(Z)^G(Z) exists as a limit in the *complex* plane (aka, Z is complex and approaches the (real or complex) value W) then it has to be 1. I realize this is really off the thread's topic, though. Eduardo ==== I want to order some Klotz memory cards. I noticed that you have to send the credit card numbers by fax. I dont have a fax machine and I have never used fax. Can my computer fax? Someone please explain to me how to do this. ==== You need a modem with fax support, and... If you have Windows XP you have fax. http://www.microsoft.com/WindowsXP/expertzone/columns/crawford/02october21.a sp You can also try one of the many fax software offered here: http://www.electrasoft.com/ Johannes >I want to order some Klotz memory cards. I noticed that you have to send the credit card numbers by fax. I >dont have a fax machine and I have never used fax. Can my computer >fax? Someone please explain to me how to do this. > ==== I'm tired of having files floating around in HOME because I forgot to switch into the correct directory and having to recall to stack, purge & re-store into correct directory. Is there a file utility out there for the 48SX that allows *moving* files among directories? I tried KillCommander and Donelly's FileManager but neither has this feature. Eduardo ==== That brings up another related thing: I have a 'HOME.' just below the real HOME so that it is less cluttered no matter in which do you prefer to think as your HOME but the IOPAR and all such OS things goes to the real HOME PS: Could this be the chosen one? http://www.hpcalc.org/details.php?id=2395 I'm tired of having files floating around in HOME because I forgot to > switch into the correct directory and having to recall to stack, purge & > re-store into correct directory. Is there a file utility out there for the > 48SX that allows *moving* files among directories? I tried KillCommander > and Donelly's FileManager but neither has this feature. > Eduardo ==== written it! So {HOME HOME} is your home away from home? ;-) Eduardo > That brings up another related thing: > I have a 'HOME.' just below the real HOME > so that it is less cluttered > no matter in which do you prefer to think as your HOME > but the IOPAR and all such OS things goes to the real HOME > PS: Could this be the chosen one? > http://www.hpcalc.org/details.php?id=2395 ==== I'm tired of having files floating around in HOME because I forgot to > switch into the correct directory and having to recall to stack, purge & > re-store into correct directory. Is there a file utility out there for the > 48SX that allows *moving* files among directories? I tried KillCommander > and Donelly's FileManager but neither has this feature. > One answer: PCT 5.0 Available on hpcalc.org ==== { HOME HOME. }@ note the dot after my own HOMEdot It is so small in many fonts. PS: There must be a better SysRPL/ML solution... > written it! So {HOME HOME} is your home away from home? ;-) Eduardo That brings up another related thing: > I have a 'HOME.' just below the real HOME > so that it is less cluttered > no matter in which do you prefer to think as your HOME > but the IOPAR and all such OS things goes to the real HOME > PS: Could this be the chosen one? > http://www.hpcalc.org/details.php?id=2395 > ==== :-) Eduardo ==== > no matter in which do you prefer to think as your HOME > but the IOPAR and all such OS things goes to the real HOME Unless you have renamed your HOME ... http://www.hpcc.org/V21N3/home.html HPCC #1046 ==== Oh, much too nice! Could we please have that in the 49G, too?! no matter in which do you prefer to think as your HOME > but the IOPAR and all such OS things goes to the real HOME Unless you have renamed your HOME ... http://www.hpcc.org/V21N3/home.html HPCC #1046 ==== A while (fairly long while) ago, I sent in my hp49 for a warranty replacement. After several weeks with no word from HP, I called them up and requested a cash refund (since they seemed to be unable to deliver a timely replacement). The HP fellow I spoke to (Graham Fraser) offered to have an hp49 shipped to me from Europe via UPS. I agreed, and the calculator arrived in 3 or 4 days. So, if any of you are waiting on replacements, calling up and sounding unhappy might help somewhat! I'm seriously considering selling this HP49 and getting an HP48 instead. Would anyone be interested in a just-replaced HP49 for $250 or so? I'm in Sydney, Australia. Alan ==== >In message <6gm0avsjjol3a8650qrs2dk1fcn2qltaoi@4ax.com>, Rodger Pay attention at the back! :-) >This story was posted to the group back on the 26th March. Obviously your posting technique isn't as good as mine; you elicited no response from the group, while I got a couple. :-) o.uk ==== > Correction is easy on the 48 but painful on the 49. > It has been ported from the HP48 to the HP49 and included in the > library GTOOLS. It's not very big (around 13kB). I find it useful > enough to have it in my HP49 all the time. I loaded GTOOLS. Powerful, indeed. Cursor movement excellent. Very pleasant that one can suspend a PICTURE session to visit the stack. That I missed so much in the default PICTURE environement. But we have seemingly a different opinion on what is big :-) Your rompointer PICT-> looks as follows :: CK0 :: GBUFF TOTEMPOB ; ; Why don't you simply write :: CKO GBUFF TOTEMPOB ; to save 5 bytes? The best of all is your ABOUT, a UsrRPL program in which you could save with your own elegant commands $>GROBCR or ViewStrobject at least 10 bytes. You must have written it veryvery long ago :-) > I guess I can always review the cursor handling in the original HP > graphic editor. It's not my fault if was poorly coded in the first > place and doesn't take into account that the OS (and the Interrupt > System) is much much faster on the HP49 so the delay in the cursor > is not good. But this was, IMHO, your business, not that of the Corvallis people or anybody else. > Should be based on the clock. I'll look into that. Please don't forget that. I've unfortunately no time to report bugs. Perhaps you can add at this occasion a HALT to one of the graphic application menus, and a (x,y) for the true pixel coordinates :-) - Wolfgang ==== > I loaded GTOOLS. Powerful, indeed. Cursor movement excellent. Very > pleasant that one can suspend a PICTURE session to visit the stack. > That I missed so much in the default PICTURE environement. But we have > seemingly a different opinion on what is big :-) Your rompointer PICT-> looks as follows :: CK0 :: GBUFF TOTEMPOB ; ; > Why don't you simply write :: CKO GBUFF TOTEMPOB ; to save 5 bytes? This is an historical reason. The original GTOOLS were using absolute addresses. There's a label before :: GBUFF TOTEMPOB ; that I'm using a few times to save space :) ==== If you have an old serial mouse, just use it's cable. The connectors are already made to work. You only have to reverse the two inside wires on the 4 pin side and slap some heat-shrink on there. mine been working for years just great. ==== I am using a serial port on my PC to connect to an HP 48GX (Rev R ROM) using HP's Serial Interface Kit software (on Windows 98). I know the connection is good, because I can put the 48 in server mode, and I can execute remote commands using the UI on the PC. MKRAM.KER (from hpcc.org) to the 48, as instructed. The first time I tried it, most of the file was transferred, then a glitch occured (I assume) and so I reset the 48 using ON-A-F. [I have a 128k card in slot 1, merged with the 48's memory.] Now, whenever I try to transfer the file, the 48 complains Error: Bad Argument Value after about 2 seconds, and the UI on the PC says Error sendin files. I know it must be simple, but after restarting the PC, re-installing the 48 utilities on the PC and resetting the calculator, I am stuck. Also, whenever I go to Right-Shift I/O to invoke the comms on the 48, the default is always KERMIT. Can I set Xmodem to be the default? TIA, Mark. ==== Please, put your HP-48GX in RPN MODE. Now, configure for Binary and delete extension (.KER) and try again. Miguel Angel CAPORALINI HERK (M.A.C.H.) **************************************************************************** **** > I am using a serial port on my PC to connect to an HP 48GX (Rev R ROM) using > HP's Serial Interface Kit software (on Windows 98). I know the connection > is good, because I can put the 48 in server mode, and I can execute remote > commands using the UI on the PC. MKRAM.KER (from hpcc.org) to the 48, as instructed. The first time I tried > it, most of the file was transferred, then a glitch occured (I assume) and > so I reset the 48 using ON-A-F. [I have a 128k card in slot 1, merged with > the 48's memory.] Now, whenever I try to transfer the file, the 48 complains Error: Bad > Argument Value after about 2 seconds, and the UI on the PC says Error > sendin files. I know it must be simple, but after restarting the PC, > re-installing the 48 utilities on the PC and resetting the calculator, I am > stuck. Also, whenever I go to Right-Shift I/O to invoke the comms on the 48, the > default is always KERMIT. Can I set Xmodem to be the default? TIA, Mark. ==== See the setup.tx file of mk230.zip (www.hpcalc.org), and then try again. **************************************************************************** **** 1-Unprotect the card if necessary and merge it with MERGE1 (in the Left shift- Library menu). 2-Empty the whole port 0. For instructions, read chapter 28 of the User's Guide. If there is no important data in your calculator, it is easier to initialize it by pressing simultaneously the keys ON, A and F, and answering NO. 3-Transfer the program named RECV.KER from the PC to the calculator, with XMODEM or KERMIT. 4-Then transfer the file MKRAM.KER. XMODEM is recommended, because of the huge size of this file. In order to use XMODEM, with an HP48 REV R, just use the built-in command XRECV. With an HP48 REV M or P, first send the file XRECV.PRG from the PC to the calculator, then use it as if it was the standard XRECV command. 5-On the calculator, put the name of this file on the stack. and execute the program RECV.KER. **************************************************************************** **** Miguel Angel CAPORALINI HERK (M.A.C.H.) **************************************************************************** **** > I am using a serial port on my PC to connect to an HP 48GX (Rev R ROM) using > HP's Serial Interface Kit software (on Windows 98). I know the connection > is good, because I can put the 48 in server mode, and I can execute remote > commands using the UI on the PC. MKRAM.KER (from hpcc.org) to the 48, as instructed. The first time I tried > it, most of the file was transferred, then a glitch occured (I assume) and > so I reset the 48 using ON-A-F. [I have a 128k card in slot 1, merged with > the 48's memory.] Now, whenever I try to transfer the file, the 48 complains Error: Bad > Argument Value after about 2 seconds, and the UI on the PC says Error > sendin files. I know it must be simple, but after restarting the PC, > re-installing the 48 utilities on the PC and resetting the calculator, I am > stuck. Also, whenever I go to Right-Shift I/O to invoke the comms on the 48, the > default is always KERMIT. Can I set Xmodem to be the default? TIA, Mark. ==== I do not intend to start some flame wars... but I think the below information that I have compiled may be useful to some of you. This is the result of my research on the web about the history of calculators. It does not exist as it is on the web, as many sites focus only on one brand of calcs, or do not have date information. Basically, this simple spreasheet sorts the major innovations by year, with the first machine to introduce it, and then the 'replies' by the I tried to make this information as objective as possible (although I post it on comp.sys.hp48 which shows that I am kind of biased ;)). I welcome corrections if any piece of information is unaccurate. As a short summary, my conclusions are as follows: 1) More than 50% of all major inovations were introduced by HP: The first scientific (HP-35, 1972), the first programmable (HP-65, 1974), the first alphanumeric (HP-41C,1979), the first native complex & matrix support (HP-15C, 1982), the first symbolic (HP-28C, 1987), the first (and last) bi-directionnal IR and PC link(HP-48SX, 1990). 2) Casio excelled in one thing: screens ! With some of the first LCD displays (fx-502P), multi-line machines (PB-700) and, above all, first calc was a fx-8500G in high school. Although I became a die-hard fan of HP latter with the HP-48SX, and that now I discover the virtue of the simple yet powerful and efficient HP-41CX (amazing machine, even for today: with the good emulator on Palm, P41CV, you have today a truely pocketable marvel !), I never forgot that Casio was once not so bad. 3) TI almost did not innovate at all. The only 2 notable innovative machines were the TI-59 (1977), the first one with ROM modules, and, much latter, the TI-92 (first with CAS - but can that thing be called a calculator ??, 1995), corrected by the first 'calc-size' CAS (TI-89 in 1998 - with Flash ROM). 4) Sharp invented the basic pocket computer. That's about it... Now, TI is dominating the market. Conclusion: Innovation does not serve success... look at Micro$oft ! :) HP, wake up !! What has Carly done to you ??? Your comments are welcome. Vincent Weber 1972 Scientific HP-35 TI-Datamath 1972 1972 LCD Sharp EL-805 TI-Minimath 1973 Casio CP-10 1974 1973 Business HP-80 TI-Business Analyst 1976 Casio FC-1000 1986? 1974 Programmable HP-65 TI-SR52 1975 Casio-FX201P 1976 1974 Card reader HP-65 TI-SR52 1975 1975 Timer HP-55 TI-65 1987 1976 Fully merged steps HP-67 TI-57 1977 1976 Continuous memory HP-25C TI-58C 1978 1977 ROM modules TI-59 HP-41C 1979 1978 Business programmable HP-38E/C TI-BA54 1982 1982 Programmer's HP-16C 1983 Multi-line Casio PB-700 Sharp PC-1260/1350 1984 HP-18C 1986 1984 PDA Psion Organizer 1 Sharp PC-1100 1985 Casio IF8000 1987 1986 Output I/R HP-18C 1987 Touch-screen Casio-IF8000 Palm Pilot 1996 1988 Dual-line Calc HP-42S TI-30X IIS 1999 1989 C programmable Casio PB-2000C 1989 DOS pocket computer Atari Portfolio HP-95LX 1991 1990 Serial link HP-48SX Casio fx-7700G 1990 TI-85 1992 1990 Bi-directionnal IR HP-48SX 1991 Keyboard PDA Psion 3 HP-95LX 1991 1993 Tablet PDA Apple Newton Palm 1 1996 1995 CAS TI-92 HP-49G 1999 1998 CAS in calc size TI-89 HP-49G 1999 1998 Flash ROM TI-89 HP-49G 1999 Casio FX 1.0 2000 ==== > As a short summary, my conclusions are as follows: 1) More than 50% of all major inovations were introduced by HP: The > first scientific (HP-35, 1972), the first programmable (HP-65, 1974), > the first alphanumeric (HP-41C,1979), the first native complex & > matrix support (HP-15C, 1982), the first symbolic (HP-28C, 1987), the > first (and last) bi-directionnal IR and PC link(HP-48SX, 1990). Some other HP firsts (at least according their ads of the 1970's!): Sealed battery compartment. Other brands had circuit boards showing. First use of double-shot injection molded keys so the symbols wouldn't wear off. Other companies silk-screened the characters onto the keys and they wore off with use. Mylar moisture barrier under the keys to help protect against spills. All-in-all, the HP line was the epitome of quality. Every detail had been carefully planned and you could feel the difference in calculators just by picking one up. It didn't flex. Other brands were lighter, their cases would flex to an amazing degree and they felt cheap in comparison. Tom Lake ==== don't feel too bored while I'm away... Enjoy ! >> My HP40G Gripes >> As your flamethrowers might get a little rusty nowadays (while HP tries very effectively to keep them in good working order), I believe a recent experience might fuel (!) some use for them. So read on, and start the blast ! I'm not a new user of calculators, and purchased the HP40G at the time when HP finally lowered its price in France (it had done so in the US many many years before - but we European users are just good old cash cows, you know). Recently, as I was happily calculating at home on a numerical problem, I said to myself : Why not use a portable tool and do this while commuting ? Why not give the good old HP40G another try ?. I recalled I had put it back in the box in despair a couple of years ago, but the idea looked interesting at the time. Not for long ! So off we go. The 40 is a durable, powerful, low price offer with a wonderful CAS and I like this. Now, I start by a little program to retrain my skills on the machine. No need to reread the manual (er, User Guide), this is targeted at the educational market you know. So let's switch it on and press [Program]. My simple goal so far is to display the date correctly formatted (DD/MM/YYYY) plus the day on screen. Hum, no string manipulation. No free position display of data on screen (only DISP ;). So let's display on consecutive lines. Well well, how was this 'difference of dates' function called by the way ? No catalog. No way to search for a function. Nothing in possibly related function catalogs. By the way, those menus never recall what was the last family used, so let's scroll up and down every time... OK, I'm done, this program can't be written. The input form capability can't display a screen for input of multiple values at once (while it is possible, the system does this all the time - see the [Plot Setup] for example). Now I'm in a bad mood, but let's try a small calculation for fun. Let's look at the history in search of an example I have done in the past. Easy to use, but the history displays only two past calculations at a time (one line for expression, one for result, this 2 times makes for the 4 available lines). Not very good, since there is a wasted line both at the top AND the bottom of the screen? Yes yes, TI does no such mistakes ! On the competition, there are 8 lines of which 7 keep previous calculations. I like the fact that you can remove flexibly past entries or results on the 40G, but this is a meager benefit. Why not the ability to switch to a small font, or remove those useless decorating lines ? OK, I just found a simple integral, so simple in fact that I can figure it in my head in under 5 seconds. But let's run it : integral of (x+1)/(x-1) from -1 to 0. Typing... Syntax Error ! A nice popup, but it obscures the screen and slows down the process : you must take an extra step to acknowledge the error (never too good to insist in saying that the user is dumb, right ?). Well, what I need is some help, and I recall there is a function to explain all operations. What a nice feature ! Not so. I cancel the error message, and get back to the bad expression. Strange that the 40G doesn't take the 'standard' syntax used on every single graphing calculator I know : integral(function, var, start, stop). Well, why make it easy ? Now, I face an egg and chicken problem. I want to know the syntax, but I am still editing the equation. Note that as it was incorrect, it was not pushed on the history stack. Fair enough, but the help function is a command-line function itself, hence a conflict. Eventually, I find a solution : put it within quotes and prepend a DISP 1; to enter it in the history stack. A real p... in the a.. my friend. So now I have the syntax, I see that the parameters are expected in the 'wrong' order. Morale : Syntax should be an interactive tool not interfering with current entries, maybe even a catalog (!!). Note also that before it accepts to give you directions, you'll have to remove all opening parentheses that the typing aid could have inserted for you. Lose what you gain. Would it be hard to recognize any line and provide help on the first word encountered ?? I now just have to recall my DISP line and (painfully - did I tell you about the keys ?) edit it to calculate. But wait ! What's going on ? Yes, w-a-i-t really, the machine loops endlessly on that simple integral. After one minute, I kill the calculation. No machine on the market should be so excruciatingly slow ! It's just amazing for such a simple function. I go into the CAS and type my integral, and yes the result comes out nicely in a few seconds. Note that I had to press OK because step-by-step display of calculations was on, I think I recall this was mandatory to see some results (like TABVAR, which doesn't work otherwise). Just painful, but not too bad. But what about those complex numbers in the result (they cancel just right, but are presented to the amazed user - the 40 also asked if I wanted complex mode ON) ? Argh. Now is the time to do what I was aiming at : graph a function defined by a 'complex' calculation. My function takes one real number and spits out another. It's time for [Program] mode again. I must enter a program name, only the 40 hasn't the brains to put me in alpha mode on name entry. Just another pitfall, my friend. I like mixed-case names, capitalizing words. So my program will be called LimMoy. How do I type this ? Alpha lock is not available on the keyboard (you must look up the soft keys), and then switching between upper and lower case is a pain. Finally I get it right. You all know that all variables are global on the 40, and you only get 26 of these (ok, 27. Or 28. 29 ? Right. Changes everything). , . I don't recall if the A..Z memories can be used for complex numbers, and at this time I don't really care any more. Time for quick results, my patience is growing thin. Another probleem arises immediately : how do I type the FOR loop I need ? Of course, HELPWITH being a command line statement, I must go back to the Home screen. Too painful, so I look at old programs I back' from this place. HP has a name for this, I think it is something like 'contextless loop', so you can't go back : you always must select a function anew. So type [Program] or [Home] again and again. Now I have the syntax : how weird ! HP chose to use the comma to separate arguments in a function BUT the semicolon ; for arguments to commands. Why, Oh Mamma why ? Don't tell me the machine can't decide between these based on the context. This is just a p... in the a.. again. I believe a program must absolutely be easily readable to be of use, as you're bound to reuse it and edit it (if you haven't run away in disgust, that is). So I always use end of lines to separate long statements. What does this mean my friend ? When I say END of line, I mean this is the END of the line. The line is FINISHED. So why oooooh why do I still have to type the statement separators ? TI did it right again ! What a pity. Also, note that the separator MUST NOT be typed between the last statement of a loop and the closing END (the statement this time). Otherwise : Syntax Error ! OK HP, I know you hate me, but I hate you too now !!!! Do I have to say that verbose programming style is the norm on this machine (take a look at INPUT) ? Also, where is the [STO>] key on the keyboard ? Oh yes it is a soft key, but to me this function is so fundamental that it should be available at any time. We only have 6 soft keys, so reserving one space for the STO key is a waste. On the other hand, if HP programmers have forgotten to reserve a space for the STO key on *ONE* menu, you're just stuck (I haven't seen this happen, but why create a potential bug waiting to happen ?). At long last, my program is correct (albeit pitiful). To run it, you have two possibilities : either use the [Program] menu, but you can't see the result, or use the command line, but you can't get a typing aid for the program name. HP, you did it again ! (***Correction : as I reread this, I recall a solution on the command line : just use the [Vars] menu. Still 5 keypresses at minimum, but this is much less than retyping the name !) The results are correct, now I want to plug this program into the grapher. But this is not possible : RUN is not allowed in the grapher, neither is (X). No Graph(Something) capability from the command line either. So finally I'm stuck !! Yes they finally got me !! Too bad this toy is a little too expensive for the trash can. To be honest, I'm not convinced other graphing calculators (apart the TI92/89) are capable of defining user functions (the wonderful HP71B had them in good ol'times...). For the record, I finally did this and a lot more on the TI92 with great success, the TI92 has even a script capability which allows you to create worksheets mixing comments and calculations with the capability to run these on a split screen, what a nice feature (teachers must love this !). Well, goodbye HP40G. Tomorrow you're back in the box. But this time, I won't forget. Just to say farewell, I do some tests on the CAS. Nice feature, very badly integrated with the normal operation of the calculator. I know it is possible to transfer expressions back and forth between CAS and command line, but without the manual I dare you to find it. I didn't. Also, remember that the expressions will have to be carefully rewritten by hand, since the sommand line uses S1/S2/... variables for unknowns while the CAS accepts the normal X/Y/... The CAS settings are accessible if you search a little, but it is very unfriendly. For instance, the settings displayed are the reverse of what's in effect - logical if you consider that selecting that line will put the item in effect (You see, I just can't explain that screen !!!). Why didn't they use a configuration screen like the [Modes] screen ? Was this designed by another person without synchronization with the main team or what ? What strikes me too is the bad use of the available keys. The 6 Aplet management keys are of minor importance and could have been put as Shift- or Alpha- functions of the soft keys (these key combinations are unusable now as the soft keys have no secondary function labelled). Also, why put the alpha characters BELOW their corresponding key ? I typed the wrong key an uncountalbe number of times. There is no justification for this, space is available above the keys. And please please please give me alpha lock !!! Well, this is the end of the road. As for CAS, the overall slowness and strange opinions on a valid result prevent its use. As for the use of screen real estate, it is a joke (I would say a case in point). As for the typing facilities and ease of accessing the functions, it is a pain. Farewell. ==== > don't feel too bored while I'm away... Enjoy ! > >My HP40G Gripes >As your flamethrowers might get a little rusty nowadays (while HP > tries very effectively to keep them in good working order), I believe > a recent experience might fuel (!) some use for them. > So read on, and start the blast ! > It is unfortunate that you've spent more time writing this rant than reading the manual. You would have learned on how you can very easily display more than one item on a screen. The HP40G has an additional feature DISPXY that hasn't been documented due to its late introduction. To see how it works: HELPWITH DISPXY like with any other commands You would have got how to actually calculate an integral (which is the same way as any other HP calculators). The standard? HP calculators were the first to actually calculate an integral in a symbolic calculator. I guess you could say that HP way of writing it IS the standard. calculator or to spend a little bit of time reading the manual If I had to throw away any piece of machine I bought because I couldn't use it at its best within 5 minutes I wouldn't own anything. Have a look at the manual, I believe the HP40G is one of the easiest machine to use. It does work differently than some other machines but you will quickly see that the logic behind each action is very clear and very sharp. Sure the TI83 let you do things differently, but these two calculators are not in the same range. It's like comparing a DOS machine to a MacOS one and say: MacOS sucks it doesn't work like my good old DOS machine ==== > Strange that the 40G doesn't take the 'standard' > syntax used on every single graphing calculator I know : I for one am extremely happy that HP doesn't do things like everyone else. If they followed everyone else, we wouldn't have RPN calculators. > integral(function, var, start, stop). Hmmm...when I write the integral on paper, I say to myself in my head The integral from (start) to (stop) of (function) d(var). In your example, I would read it the integral from -1 to 0 of (x+1)/(x-1) dx. HP's way seems more logical, even if it isn't like every other [TI] calculator you've ever seen. > HP chose to use the comma to separate > arguments in a function BUT the semicolon ; for arguments to > commands. Isn't this the way C++ works? Semi-colons for loop commands and commas for functions? Aw, no one uses that old programming language anyway. You're comparing the HP-40G to a TI-92. This seems a little like comparing a Ford Mustang to a Chevrolet Cavalier, and coming to the conclusion that all the cars Chevy makes are slow and cheap. You can't expect HP's mid-range calculator to compete with TI's top of the line calculator. I own an HP-49G and haven't had any of the problems that you have described. The equation writer (which you have to buy separately on the TI) takes care of most of the formatting issues. The HP-49G evaluated the integral you mentioned in 2.8494 seconds. Granted, you could have still done it faster in your head (it took a couple seconds to type it in) but I would not consider this painfully slow. Of course, I got a decimal approximation in .1694 seconds. This is quite a bit faster than most people can do in their heads (unless you happen to have memorized the 2*Ln(2) ). You want to see slow, try using the numerical solver on the TI. --CS ==== > HP chose to use the comma to separate > arguments in a function BUT the semicolon ; for arguments to > commands. > Isn't this the way C++ works? Semi-colons for loop commands and > commas for functions? Aw, no one uses that old programming language > anyway. On the 89 there is only 1 command that can take it arguments seperated by a ';' It is the augment command. augment([5],[6]) gives [[5,6]] augment([5];[6]) gives [[5] [6]] I thing ti engineers like to make things hard for themselves because this is accomplished by two different tags for augment, the tokenizer picks between them depending on how the arguments are seperated. > I own an HP-49G and haven't had any of the problems that you have > described. The equation writer (which you have to buy separately on > the TI) takes care of most of the formatting issues. Four links: http://triton.towson.edu/users/bbhatt1/ti/eqw.htm FREE http://home19.inet.tele.dk/ew/eqwflash.htm NOT FREE http://www.calvin.edu/~sstear70/exw.html FREE And for the 83+ http://www.softheiss.de/int_prj_prettypt.html FREE, The interface for this is an entry line that simulateously displays what you are writing as a pretty print expression. -Samuel S, My Yahoo acount is just for Spam. ==== I'm glad to see that you spent some time experimenting. Some of your comments are fair, others are the result of inexperience with the machine (notice I avoid using the word 'ignorance' :-). > So off we go. The 40 is a durable, powerful, low price offer with a > wonderful CAS and I like this. Bear it in mind that the calculator was aimed at a low price high school market. It's pretty damn good for the price charged! > Now, I start by a little program to > retrain my skills on the machine. No need to reread the manual (er, > User Guide), this is targeted at the educational market you know. Do I really need to comment on the statement No need to reread the manual???? > So let's switch it on and press [Program]. If you'd read the manual you'd know that's not necessarily the best way to go. The proper procedure, except for small utility programs, is to write an aplet. > My simple goal so far is to > display the date correctly formatted (DD/MM/YYYY) plus the day on > screen. Hum, no string manipulation. True and a bad lack. Hopefully fixed soon with the addition of a library currently being developed. > No free position display of data > on screen (only DISP ;). Not true. Use DISPXY or DISP with multiple vars output. You can also use MSGBOX to pop up a box with the result. > So let's display on > consecutive lines. Well well, how was this 'difference of dates' > function called by the way ? No catalog. No way to search for a > function. Nothing in possibly related function catalogs. The MATH button contains functions sorted by use. Unfortunately not linked to syntax which, I agree, is a pain. > By the way, > those menus never recall what was the last family used, so let's > scroll up and down every time... Simply press the first letter of the menu or function you want. For example, pressing the 7 button ('P') will jump to Polynomial functions. This trick works in ANY menu. > OK, I'm done, this program can't be written. The input form capability > can't display a screen for input of multiple values at once (while it > is possible, the system does this all the time - see the [Plot Setup] > for example). The program can be written but admittedly not using input of multiple values. The command: will produce the output you require. The only drawback is that 30 April, manipulation means that you can't have the extra zero. > [..]the history displays only two past calculations > at a time (one line for expression, one for result, this 2 times makes > for the 4 available lines). Not very good, since there is a wasted > line both at the top AND the bottom of the screen? Not a valid criticism. If you are scrolling back through the history then it is more likely that you will be seeking a result than the calculation that led to it. This is not an opinion but based on observation of students using the 38G and 39G. > I cancel the error message, and get back to > the bad expression. Well, why make it easy ? Now, I > face an egg and chicken problem. I want to know the syntax, but I am > still editing the equation. Note that as it was incorrect, it was not > pushed on the history stack. Fair enough, but the help function is a > command-line function itself, hence a conflict. I agree with this criticism. > Strange that the 40G doesn't take the 'standard' > syntax used on every single graphing calculator I know : > integral(function, var, start, stop). Crap! I don't care what the rest of the world does, it makes sense to me to have the parameters in the order in which you speak the function. By this I mean, we say The integral from 1 to 3 of funtion dx and that's how it is entered: integral(1,3,function,X) Other functions, such as differentiation and summation are the same. As JYA says, HP did it first so the rest of the world are the ones not doing it right! > Moral : Syntax should be an interactive tool not interfering with > current entries, maybe even a catalog (!!). I agree. > Now is the time to do what I was aiming at : graph a function defined > by a 'complex' calculation. If you mean a calculation involving complex numbers then very few calculators will graph these in the way you seem to expect. Certainly not one for this price. If you simply mean a calculation which is 'not simple' then it can be done but admittedly not conveniently. In your program, create a list var (say L1) using MAKELIST that contains the function values for Xmin to Xmax step (Xmax-Xmin)/131. eg. MAKELIST(X^3-X,X,Xmin,Xmax,(Xmax-Xmin)/131) /> L1: If your function is too complex to fit into the MAKELIST then simply create an empty list and then use a FOR loop to calculate its values. These values correspond to the pixel points on the horizontal width of the screen. Now, in the Function aplet, graph the function I'm NOT, by the way, claiming that this is at all easy or convenient! Just that it can be done. I agree that it would have been nice to be able to define a user function and then graph it. However, again, this is not the sort of thing one expects in a mid-range calculator aimed at high school students. > My function takes one real number and spits out another. It's time for > [Program] mode again. I must enter a program name, only the 40 hasn't > the brains to put me in alpha mode on name entry. I agree. > I like mixed-case names, capitalizing words. So my > program will be called LimMoy. How do I type this ? Alpha lock is > not available on the keyboard (you must look up the soft keys), and > then switching between upper and lower case is a pain. Finally I get > it right. I think it is better on the soft keys so that it is only available when required and does not take up a permanent hard key. A large group of people spent a LOT of time thinking about what keys should appear as hard keys. I don't see any easy way if you're going to insist on mixing cases. > You all know that all variables are global on the 40, and you only get > 26 of these (ok, 27. Or 28. 29 ? Right. Changes everything). conflicts on>, . var of any required length and use it to store your vars. I agree it would have been nice to have longer names for vars though. > I don't recall if the A..Z > memories can be used for complex numbers, and at this time I don't > really care any more. Time for quick results, my patience is growing > thin. They can't. Use the complex vars Z1, Z2,... Z0. > Another probleem arises immediately : how do I type the FOR loop I > need ? [...] how weird ! HP chose to use the comma to separate > arguments in a function BUT the semicolon ; for arguments to > commands. Why, Oh Mamma why ? Every language has its small ways of doing things. This is quite similar to C as someone pointed out. > Don't tell me the machine can't decide > between these based on the context. True but it would have meant more complexity in the OS. More bugs, more size..... > Do I have to say that verbose programming style is the norm on this > machine (take a look at INPUT) ? Did you try using the short form of PROMPT : ? INPUT is specifically set up to be as flexible as possible to as to allow easy 'user friendly' programming. Remember (again) that this is aimed at high school students - we want the input forms to be very verbose. > Also, where is the [STO>] key on the > keyboard ? Oh yes it is a soft key, but to me this function is so > fundamental that it should be available at any time. Ummm... it is. Just go through the CHARS button if it is not a soft key in the current context. Four key presses - SHIFT CHARS LEFTARROW ENTER. > At long last, my program is correct (albeit pitiful). To run it, you > have two possibilities : either use the [Program] menu, but you can't > see the result, RTFM. Just include a FREEZE command at the end of the program. > or use the command line, but you can't get a typing > aid for the program name. HP, you did it again ! > (***Correction : as I reread this, I recall a solution on the command > line : just use the [Vars] menu. Still 5 keypresses at minimum, but > this is much less than retyping the name !) Actually 4 keypresses: VARS 'P' RIGHTARROW ENTER (if it's the first in the list), otherwise one more to press the button of the first letter in the name. This seems to me quite reasonable. > The results are correct, now I want to plug this program into the > grapher. But this is not possible : RUN is not allowed > in the grapher, neither is (X). No Graph(Something) > capability from the command line either. So finally I'm stuck !! Yes > they finally got me !! Covered earlier.... > Too bad this toy is a little too expensive for > the trash can. To be honest, I'm not convinced other graphing > calculators (apart the TI92/89) are capable of defining user functions > (the wonderful HP71B had them in good ol'times...). For the record, I > finally did this and a lot more on the TI92 with great success, the > TI92 has even a script capability which allows you to create > worksheets mixing comments and calculations with the capability to run > these on a split screen, what a nice feature (teachers must love this > !). As was commented by others, I don't think it is fair to compare it with the TI92. I think a better comparison is with the TI83+. For a detailed comparison of the HP39/40G with the TI83+ by Tim Wessman see http://www.hphomeview.com/timwesmn/ti83-hp39.pdf > What strikes me too is the bad use of the available keys. The 6 Aplet > management keys are of minor importance and could have been put as > Shift- or Alpha- functions of the soft keys (these key combinations > are unusable now as the soft keys have no secondary function > labelled). Now this shows your total misunderstanding of the philosophy of the calculator. The whole HP39G revolves around the aplets and the keys APLET, HOME, PLOT, SYMB and NUM are by far the most commonly used on the calculator. Hence their prominence. > Also, why put the alpha characters BELOW their > corresponding key ? I typed the wrong key an uncountalbe number of > times. It takes a short time to get used to and then you never do it again. > Well, this is the end of the road. You bring up some interesting and valid points in a few places but you are too quick to make a final rejection without considering that you may be mistaken in some places. ==== > HP chose to use the comma to separate > arguments in a function BUT the semicolon ; for arguments to > commands. > > Isn't this the way C++ works? Semi-colons for loop commands and > commas for functions? Aw, no one uses that old programming language > anyway. On the 89 there is only 1 command that can take it arguments seperated > by a ';' It is the augment command. augment([5],[6]) gives [[5,6]] > augment([5];[6]) gives > [[5] > [6]] I thing ti engineers like to make things hard for themselves because > this is accomplished by two different tags for augment, the tokenizer > picks between them depending on how the arguments are seperated. > I own an HP-49G and haven't had any of the problems that you have > described. The equation writer (which you have to buy separately on > the TI) takes care of most of the formatting issues. Four links: > http://triton.towson.edu/users/bbhatt1/ti/eqw.htm FREE > http://home19.inet.tele.dk/ew/eqwflash.htm NOT FREE > http://www.calvin.edu/~sstear70/exw.html FREE And for the 83+ > http://www.softheiss.de/int_prj_prettypt.html FREE, The interface for > this is an entry line that simulateously displays what you are writing > as a pretty print expression. -Samuel S, My Yahoo acount is just for Spam. my HP and are impressed. They will be happy to know that they can get one for free. I also know a lot of TI-83 owners that will be happy about the other link as well. --CS ==== > As JYA says, HP did it first so the rest of the world are the ones not > doing it right! HP most certainly didn't do it first. There have been dozens of computer algebra systems before the HP48. -- Bhuvanesh ==== As JYA says, HP did it first so the rest of the world are the ones not > doing it right! HP most certainly didn't do it first. There have been dozens of > computer algebra systems before the HP48. Were they integrated into any handheld calculators? ==== As JYA says, HP did it first so the rest of the world are the ones not > doing it right! HP most certainly didn't do it first. There have been dozens of > computer algebra systems before the HP48. HP was the first one to put it in a calculator and to calculate a numerical integral. Writing like INTEGRAL(min,max,function, variable) is by far the most logical way of writing an integral, as it's how you write it on paper. technical choice. The TI allows you to use the integral size in different way: INTEGRAL(function,variable) INTEGRAL(function,variable,min,max) etc.. Obviously writing the argument in this order allows the system to easily check what kind of result it should return. The HP49 had to stick with the original HP choice so we had to put new command like INTVX, INT, RISCH etc... As the HP49 OS doesn't have the ability to know how many arguments are supplied (they are all in the stack) ==== > As the HP49 OS doesn't have the ability to know how many arguments are > supplied (they are all in the stack) I have never seen a Too Many Arguments error on a 49. :) On a Ti89 I see it quite often, sometimes when the brackets are not in the right spots or there are some missing. >:) ==== As JYA says, HP did it first so the rest of the world are the ones not > doing it right! HP most certainly didn't do it first. There have been dozens of > computer algebra systems before the HP48. HP was the first one to put it in a calculator and to calculate a numerical >integral. Writing like INTEGRAL(min,max,function, variable) is by far the most logical >way of writing an integral, as it's how you write it on paper. > So then you agree that on the hp 2+3 should be written 2+3 Enter not as 2 Enter 3 +. Ok thats good to know. ;-) >technical choice. >The TI allows you to use the integral size in different way: >INTEGRAL(function,variable) >INTEGRAL(function,variable,min,max) etc.. Obviously writing the argument in this order allows the system to easily >check what kind of result it should return. >The HP49 had to stick with the original HP choice so we had to put new >command like INTVX, INT, RISCH etc... >As the HP49 OS doesn't have the ability to know how many arguments are >supplied (they are all in the stack) > ==== > I have never seen a Too Many Arguments error on a 49. :) On a Ti89 I see it quite often, sometimes when the brackets are not in the > right spots or there are some missing. >:) Why don't you use the Equation Writer? -- Bhuvanesh usually important. ==== > Writing like INTEGRAL(min,max,function, variable) is by far the most logical > way of writing an integral, as it's how you write it on paper. So then you agree that on the hp 2+3 should be written 2+3 > Enter not as 2 Enter 3 +. Ok thats good to know. ;-) This is an entirely different matter. You're talking RPN in the middle of an algebraic expression. The HP4x can perfectly handle '2+3' as well as 2 3 + You could even use the integral sign in RPN mode putting all your argument on the stack first. When talking about algebraic expression, writing integral(min,max, function, variable) is more logical. <662e00ed.0304300747.7c3f355b@posting.google.com> ==== In message , >Writing like INTEGRAL(min,max,function, variable) is by far the most logical >way of writing an integral, as it's how you write it on paper. So then you agree that on the hp 2+3 should be written 2+3 Enter >not as 2 Enter 3 +. Ok thats good to know. ;-) Colin's an HP38/39/40 fan so what would he know about 2 Enter 3 + ? :-) Here's a little test though. Suppose you want to evaluate 6x + 5x^2 + 4x^3 + 3x^4 + 2x^5 + x^6 where x=7. How many keystrokes do you think that it takes under algebraic versus RPN? On the 39G I entered it as read e.g. 6*7+5*7^2+4*7^3... etc. for a total of 30 keystrokes. How many keystrokes do you think it takes on an HP-12C, say, which is an RPN only machine? Answer: 19. A piddly 19. That's less than two-thirds what it takes on the 39. Wanna know how? I'll make that a mini-challenge and see who's up to it. No special tricks needed so you don't have to use a 12C. :-) -- ==== > In message , Writing like INTEGRAL(min,max,function, variable) is by far the most > logical > way of writing an integral, as it's how you write it on paper. So then you agree that on the hp 2+3 should be written 2+3 > Enter not as 2 Enter 3 +. Ok thats good to know. ;-) > Colin's an HP38/39/40 fan so what would he know about 2 Enter 3 + ? :-) I am neither ignorant nor an idiot (contrary to some opinions in this forum ;-). I have owned and used RPN calculators in the dim prehistoric past. Personally I agree that it is far more efficient once you get used to it. However, years of experience in the classroom have shown me that only the top 25% of students ever understand it well enough (and quickly enough) to make it a desirable option for the medium to low ability student. That's my ONLY objection to it. > Here's a little test though. Suppose you want to evaluate 6x + 5x^2 + > 4x^3 + 3x^4 + 2x^5 + x^6 where x=7. How many keystrokes do you think > that it takes under algebraic versus RPN? On the 39G I entered it as read e.g. 6*7+5*7^2+4*7^3... etc. for a total > of 30 keystrokes. Actually only 29 since ^2 is one keystroke. :-) > How many keystrokes do you think it takes on an HP-12C, say, which is an > RPN only machine? Answer: 19. A piddly 19. That's less than two-thirds > what it takes on the 39. Wanna know how? I'll make that a mini-challenge and see who's up to it. No special tricks needed so you don't have to use a 12C. > :-) Actually, I can do it using only 27 keystrokes on my humble little HP39G! Still not as good as 19 but getting better. Just use: 7 + 2 ENTER * 7 + 3 ENTER * 7 + 4 ENTER * 7 + 5 ENTER * 7 + 6 ENTER * 7 ENTER I thought this might be your method, using factorising as 6x + 5x^2 + 4x^3 + 3x^4 + 2x^5 + x^6 = x(6+x(5+x(4+x(3+x(2+x)))))? Actually.... 22 keystrokes is enough if we use the 'intelligence' of the HP39G efficiently! Just enter the keys below and it will fill in the * and )'s as required ;-) 7 ( 6 + 7 ( 5 + 7 ( 4 + 7 ( 3 + 7 ( 2 + 7 ENTER Now I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't this also require 22 keystrokes in RPN as below? 7 ENTER 2 + 7 * 3 + 7 * 4 + 7 * 5 + 7 * 6 + 7 * Maybe I got the wrong method because I can't get 19. Finally, I'm probably going to expose my ignorance here but bear in mind that it has been 20 years (!) since I've used RPN other than for 5 minutes here and there so be forgiving! Doesn't doing it as a straight forward expression using RPN without factorising or tricks require 37 keystrokes as follows? 7 ENTER 6 ^ 7 ENTER 5 ^ 2 * + 7 ENTER 4 ^ 3 * + 7 ENTER 3 ^ 4 * + 7 ENTER 2 ^ 5 * + 7 ENTER 6 * + Maybe I've got this wrong but if not then I think 29 (the straight forward method on the 39G) compares very well with 37 in RPN!! ==== I have never seen a Too Many Arguments error on a 49. :) On a Ti89 I see it quite often, sometimes when the brackets are not in the > right spots or there are some missing. >:) Why don't you use the Equation Writer? I do, but only for more complex equations... Sometimes I do not know the arguments needed for a function so I have to 'guess' what order to put the arguments in and how many are needed. When I was learning the 49 I got the Too Few Arguments error quite often :) ==== > Here's a little test though. Suppose you want to evaluate 6x + 5x^2 + > 4x^3 + 3x^4 + 2x^5 + x^6 where x=7. How many keystrokes do you think > that it takes under algebraic versus RPN? On the 39G I entered it as read e.g. 6*7+5*7^2+4*7^3... etc. for a total > of 30 keystrokes. How many keystrokes do you think it takes on an HP-12C, say, which is an > RPN only machine? Answer: 19. A piddly 19. That's less than two-thirds > what it takes on the 39. Now compare symbolics, on a 49 (in RPN mode) it takes 35 keystrokes to type in 6x + 5x^2 + 4x^3 + 3x^4 + 2x^5 + x^6 (with the x's), while in algebraic mode, it takes only 26 keystrokes. That's less then three-quarters of what it takes in RPN mode. Albert ==== Well said. Superior technologies are rarely mass technologies. > In message , Writing like INTEGRAL(min,max,function, variable) is by far the most > logical > way of writing an integral, as it's how you write it on paper. So then you agree that on the hp 2+3 should be written 2+3 > Enter not as 2 Enter 3 +. Ok thats good to know. ;-) > Colin's an HP38/39/40 fan so what would he know about 2 Enter 3 + ? :-) > I am neither ignorant nor an idiot (contrary to some opinions in this > forum ;-). I have owned and used RPN calculators in the dim prehistoric > past. Personally I agree that it is far more efficient once you get used > to it. However, years of experience in the classroom have shown me that > only the top 25% of students ever understand it well enough (and quickly > enough) to make it a desirable option for the medium to low ability > student. That's my ONLY objection to it. ==== > I am neither ignorant nor an idiot (contrary to some opinions in this > forum ;-). I have owned and used RPN calculators in the dim prehistoric > past. Personally I agree that it is far more efficient once you get used > to it. However, years of experience in the classroom have shown me that > only the top 25% of students ever understand it well enough (and quickly > enough) to make it a desirable option for the medium to low ability > student. That's my ONLY objection to it. > I agree with this objection, having observed the same. I have another objection against RPN, it can not handle function with variable arguments number (except if you precise the number of arguments at stack level 1), which for example is the reason why you have INTVX, RISCH, and the integral symbol, 3 differents function for the same integration function. And RPN programs are, if not commented correctly, very hard to understand, and even if commented correctly harder to modify (except if you are not using the stack intensively). Algebraic languages (like C++ or higher-level scripting CAS language) are much easier to code and modify. One of the big advantage of RPN is the memory footprint which was essential 15 years ago and (for a CAS) the fact that it must be a non-typed langage because of the stack. It is also excellent for programming parsing expressions if you don't want to use tools like flex/bison. <662e00ed.0304300747.7c3f355b@posting.google.com> <3EB1FFDD.8000705@iinet.net.au> ==== In message <3EB1FFDD.8000705@iinet.net.au>, Colin Croft > Colin's an HP38/39/40 fan so what would he know about 2 Enter 3 + >? :-) >I am neither ignorant nor an idiot (contrary to some opinions in this >forum ;-). I have owned and used RPN calculators in the dim prehistoric >past. Personally I agree that it is far more efficient once you get >used to it. However, years of experience in the classroom have shown me >that only the top 25% of students ever understand it well enough (and >quickly enough) to make it a desirable option for the medium to low >ability student. That's my ONLY objection to it. I've heard it suggested that HP should put RPN into their low-end models so that children can be exposed to it from a much earlier age i.e. from when they first start to use calculators in the classroom rather than by the time they need something more advanced and are ready to buy a 49G level machine. Does this sound reasonable, practicable? > Here's a little test though. Suppose you want to evaluate 6x + 5x^2 + >4x^3 + 3x^4 + 2x^5 + x^6 where x=7. How many keystrokes do you think >that it takes under algebraic versus RPN? > On the 39G I entered it as read e.g. 6*7+5*7^2+4*7^3... etc. for a >total of 30 keystrokes. >Actually only 29 since ^2 is one keystroke. :-) Nope it's 30. Unless I can't count key-presses while scrolling through the expression on a 39G. :-) > How many keystrokes do you think it takes on an HP-12C, say, which is >an RPN only machine? Answer: 19. A piddly 19. That's less than >two-thirds what it takes on the 39. > Wanna know how? I'll make that a mini-challenge and see who's up to >it. > No special tricks needed so you don't have to use a 12C. > :-) Actually, I can do it using only 27 keystrokes on my humble little >HP39G! Still not as good as 19 but getting better. Just use: 7 + 2 ENTER * 7 + 3 ENTER * 7 + 4 ENTER * 7 + 5 ENTER * 7 + 6 ENTER * 7 >ENTER Getting there... >I thought this might be your method, using factorising as 6x + 5x^2 + 4x^3 + 3x^4 + 2x^5 + x^6 = x(6+x(5+x(4+x(3+x(2+x)))))? Red hot! >Actually.... 22 keystrokes is enough if we use the 'intelligence' of >the HP39G efficiently! Just enter the keys below and it will fill in >the * and )'s as required ;-) 7 ( 6 + 7 ( 5 + 7 ( 4 + 7 ( 3 + 7 ( 2 + 7 ENTER Getting colder. Not bad for the algebraic machine though. >Now I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't this also >require 22 keystrokes in RPN as below? 7 ENTER 2 + 7 * 3 + 7 * 4 + 7 * 5 + 7 * 6 + 7 * Maybe I got the wrong method because I can't get 19. Finally, I'm probably going to expose my ignorance here but bear in >mind that it has been 20 years (!) since I've used RPN other than for 5 >minutes here and there so be forgiving! Doesn't doing it as a straight >forward expression using RPN without factorising or tricks require 37 >keystrokes as follows? 7 ENTER 6 ^ 7 ENTER 5 ^ 2 * + 7 ENTER 4 ^ 3 * + 7 ENTER 3 ^ 4 * + 7 >ENTER 2 ^ 5 * + 7 ENTER 6 * + Maybe I've got this wrong but if not then I think 29 (the straight >forward method on the 39G) compares very well with 37 in RPN!! 9/10 for effort :-) The bit you've forgotten during that 20 years is that the traditional HP machines have a 4 level stack (X, Y, Z and T) where T retains its contents rather than dropping them when items are consumed by an operation. Thus the 19 keystroke version is: 7 ENTER ENTER ENTER 2 + * 3 + * 4 + * 5 + * 6 + * The saving comes from not having to enter the 7 repeatedly. This is one of the very few examples where the old-style stack has an advantage over the unlimited stack of modern RPL. It's also pretty idiot-proof to evaluate since it's a repetitive enter the coefficient, press +, press * and repeat operation. -- ==== > However, years of experience in the classroom > have shown me that only the top 25% of students ever understand it > well enough (and quickly enough) to make it a desirable option for the > medium to low ability student. That's my ONLY objection to it. > > I've heard it suggested that HP should put RPN into their low-end models > so that children can be exposed to it from a much earlier age i.e. from > when they first start to use calculators in the classroom rather than by > the time they need something more advanced and are ready to buy a 49G > level machine. Does this sound reasonable, practicable? My first instinctive reaction was that it wouldn't make a difference - the top 25% would still be the only ones to really benefit. But then I stopped and thought about it: to be quite honest I don't know. I've never heard of such an experiment being conducted (getting them really young I mean) and I don't know whether it would make a difference. Does anyone know of a serious study having been done comparing achievement using RPN vs algebraic, differentiated by mathematical ability and/or age at time of first exposure? 9/10 for effort :-) The bit you've forgotten during that 20 years is > that the traditional HP machines have a 4 level stack (X, Y, Z and T) > where T retains its contents rather than dropping them when items are > consumed by an operation. Thus the 19 keystroke version is: 7 ENTER ENTER ENTER 2 + * 3 + * 4 + * 5 + * 6 + * The saving comes from not having to enter the 7 repeatedly. > You're quite right - I was not aware of that. What a neat idea! I had been assuming a three or four level stack as was the case on the machine I used for some time in the early eighties. A very early HP that my brother bought - the first programmable one I seem to remember. Don't know what the model was. I can see why the idea would be handy but I suspect that, despite your comment of it being 'idiot proof', you'd really have to have a fair bit of practice before it became easy to use without having to stop and think about it. I'd have to have a play before I could make a guess as to whether it would raise or lower that 25% who'd get it well enough. ==== > In message <3EB1FFDD.8000705@iinet.net.au>, Colin Croft X > 9/10 for effort :-) The bit you've forgotten during that 20 years is > that the traditional HP machines have a 4 level stack (X, Y, Z and T) > where T retains its contents rather than dropping them when items are > consumed by an operation. Thus the 19 keystroke version is: 7 ENTER ENTER ENTER 2 + * 3 + * 4 + * 5 + * 6 + * The saving comes from not having to enter the 7 repeatedly. This is one of the very few examples where the old-style stack has an > advantage over the unlimited stack of modern RPL. It's also pretty > idiot-proof to evaluate since it's a repetitive enter the coefficient, > press +, press * and repeat operation. A) Since I use NDUPN quite often, I have it on keyboard, - one can spell it: 7 [SPC] 6 hold [ALPHA] press N D U P N release [ALPHA] then [ENTER] continue with DROP 2 + * 3 + * 4 + * 5 + * 6 + * - call it from the CATalog: 7 [SPC] @ or [ENTER]@ 6 [CAT] [ALPHA] [N] [DownArrow] [ENTER] continue with DROP 2 + * 3 + * 4 + * 5 + * 6 + * - use [TOOL] softmenu keys: 7 [SPC] 6 [TOOL] |STACK| (F3) and [LeftShift] PREV (Lor NXT) then |NDUPN| (F1) continue with DROP 2 + * 3 + * 4 + * 5 + * 6 + * - or have it on some key like I do 7 [ENTER] 6 shift&hold [LeftShift] ANS @ assigned key continue with 2 + * 3 + * 4 + * 5 + * 6 + * (I have my own NDUP which has the DROP build-in as ; ) B) The hard way: 7 [ENTER] [ENTER] [ENTER] [ENTER] [ENTER] [ENTER] continue with 2 + * 3 + * 4 + * 5 + * 6 + * OR 7 [SPC] 7 [SPC] 7 [SPC] 7 [SPC] 7 [SPC] 7 [ENTER] continue with 2 + * 3 + * 4 + * 5 + * 6 + * OR 7 [SPC] 7 [SPC] 7 [ENTER] [LeftShift] [CMD] [ENTER] [ENTER] continue with 2 + * 3 + * 4 + * 5 + * 6 + * Ayway the HP 28/48/49 style is not as good in keystrokes as the old system. there is always a trade-off... PS: Is there yet another way to do it? ==== > Ayway the HP 28/48/49 style is not as good in keystrokes as the old system. > there is always a trade-off... > PS: Is there yet another way to do it? Yes. [p/r] + 7 * [p/r] 7 [enter] 2 [r/s] 3 [r/s] 4 [r/s] 5 [r/s] 6 [r/s] For a total of seventeen keystrokes... dd. ==== > I agree with this objection, having observed the same. I have > another objection against RPN, it can not handle function with > variable arguments number (except if you precise the number > of arguments at stack level 1), which for example is the reason Expect one list of arguments. ==== > >Here's a little test though. Suppose you want to evaluate 6x + 5x^2 + >4x^3 + 3x^4 + 2x^5 + x^6 where x=7. How many keystrokes do you think >that it takes under algebraic versus RPN? On the 39G I entered it as read e.g. 6*7+5*7^2+4*7^3... etc. for a total >of 30 keystrokes. How many keystrokes do you think it takes on an HP-12C, say, which is an >RPN only machine? Answer: 19. A piddly 19. That's less than two-thirds >what it takes on the 39. > Now compare symbolics, on a 49 (in RPN mode) it takes 35 keystrokes to type > in 6x + 5x^2 + 4x^3 + 3x^4 + 2x^5 + x^6 (with the x's), while in algebraic > mode, it takes only 26 keystrokes. That's less then three-quarters of what > it takes in RPN mode. Albert How about (where E = enter) 7 E E E E E (puts 6 copies of x on the stack) 2 + * (x^2 + 2x) 3 + * (x^3 + 2x^2 + 3x) 4 + * (x^4 + 2x^3 + 3x^2 + 4x) 5 + * (x^5 + 2x^4 + 3x^3 + 4x^2 + 4x) 6 + * (the whole megilla) 21 strokes and the values of x only has to be entered once. btw, isn't there a command on the 49 for evaluating a polynomial given the values and a vecor of coefficients? Martin Cohen ==== > Now compare symbolics, on a 49 (in RPN mode) it takes 35 keystrokes to type > in 6x + 5x^2 + 4x^3 + 3x^4 + 2x^5 + x^6 (with the x's), while in algebraic > mode, it takes only 26 keystrokes. That's less then three-quarters of what > it takes in RPN mode. I got 34 for both entry modes. You didn't count the 2 enter pushes per term in the middle, right? If you do, you get 2*4 more pushes, and that's not including the final Enter, which would bring the EQW version to 35. I do have to admit, the entry was much more straightforward in EQW mode though... -Aaron ==== X > btw, isn't there a command on the 49 for evaluating > a polynomial given the values and a vecor of coefficients? [LeftShift] [ * ] gives [ square brackets ] then I use [SPC] [1 2 3 4 5 6 0] the [RightArrow] 7 hold [ALPHA] P E V A L release [ALPHA] and press [ENTER] PS: Maybe one could use SEQ or DOLIST ==== >I agree with this objection, having observed the same. I have >another objection against RPN, it can not handle function with >variable arguments number (except if you precise the number >of arguments at stack level 1), which for example is the reason > Expect one list of arguments. Then it takes one argument, the list. Remember that you can not do what you want with lists (e.g. inside symbolics). ==== > On an AOS machine, the user has to use a lot of parenthesis to reach the > same level of confidence in the results than an RPN user. I think that's > the biggest advantage of RPN over AOS. Actually I find by observing high school students that they seldom use brackets on the 39G. rally they will evaluate part of the expression something like 2+4 ---- 3+5 would be done as 2+4 ENTER. Then 3+5 ENTER. Then copy result and divide by copy result. I use an absurdly simple example here - in reality with one that simple they'd mostly use their heads (well, sometimes. Sigh!). But you get the idea. They do not tend to have confidence in brackets because of the way that they are so often 'implied' rather than specifically stated, as in the example above. ==== > btw, isn't there a command on the 49 for evaluating > a polynomial given the values and a vecor of coefficients? You're right! There certainly is on the 39G - it's called POLYEVAL. Doing it that way requires 25 keystrokes, including those needed to fetch it from the menu. ie. POLYEVAL([1,2,3,4,5,6,0],7 ENTER (no final bracket is required). <662e00ed.0304300747.7c3f355b@posting.google.com> <3EB1FFDD.8000705@iinet.net.au> ==== In message , David Davies Ayway the HP 28/48/49 style is not as good in keystrokes as the old system. > there is always a trade-off... > PS: Is there yet another way to do it? Yes. [p/r] + 7 * [p/r] 7 [enter] 2 [r/s] 3 [r/s] 4 [r/s] 5 [r/s] 6 [r/s] For a total of seventeen keystrokes... 10/10 for effort but [p/r] is two keystrokes[1] so that brings it up to 19 - the same as mine. [1] For the benefit of those without an HP-12C, [p/r] is a shifted function. -- ==== You're right! There certainly is on the 39G - it's called POLYEVAL. > Doing it that way requires 25 keystrokes, including those needed to > fetch it from the menu. > ie. POLYEVAL([1,2,3,4,5,6,0],7 ENTER (no final bracket is required). Please note that the bracket is not required on the HP39/40G only. It is required on the HP38 ==== >You're right! There certainly is on the 39G - it's called POLYEVAL. >Doing it that way requires 25 keystrokes, including those needed to >fetch it from the menu. >ie. POLYEVAL([1,2,3,4,5,6,0],7 ENTER (no final bracket is required). > Please note that the bracket is not required on the HP39/40G only. It is > required on the HP38 > Ummm.. actually no - it's not required on the 38G either. :-) ==== > However, years of experience in the classroom > have shown me that only the top 25% of students ever understand it > well enough (and quickly enough) to make it a desirable option for the > medium to low ability student. That's my ONLY objection to it. I've heard it suggested that HP should put RPN into their low-end models > so that children can be exposed to it from a much earlier age i.e. from > when they first start to use calculators in the classroom rather than by > the time they need something more advanced and are ready to buy a 49G > level machine. Does this sound reasonable, practicable? My first instinctive reaction was that it wouldn't make a difference - > the top 25% would still be the only ones to really benefit. But then I > stopped and thought about it: to be quite honest I don't know. I've > never heard of such an experiment being conducted (getting them really > young I mean) and I don't know whether it would make a difference. Does > anyone know of a serious study having been done comparing achievement > using RPN vs algebraic, differentiated by mathematical ability and/or > age at time of first exposure? No, I don't know of any such study, but here are a few anecdotal observations. When my grandniece was in junior high, she forgot to bring her calculator home, and asked if she could borrow one of mine to do her homework. I had my 28S with me, and after I showed her how to do basic arithmetic on it, she was delighted; so much easier than the calculator that she had been using. The 49G came out, and she talked me out of one of those (it looks cool), so now I have my 28S back. Oh well, I suppose that the 28S will be a collector's item soon. My niece, not quite middle-aged yet, seldom uses math for anything more complicated than balancing her checkbook or calculating a percentage. Recently, she was trying to add a column of a few hundred figures with a calculator, and kept having to start over. She said I hate calculators! I wish I had an adding machine!. I offered a 48GX, showed her how to do basic arithmetic with it, and she got it done with one try. Her comment was something like: Now this is how calculators *should* work. Maybe it's a tic quirk? But my sister and her husband, both math teachers, insist that RPN/RPL is far too complicated. Hard to figure; they were both math majors in college, and graduated before handheld calculators were available to most people, so I know that they're not stupid. I'm convinced that anyone who hasn't been too indoctrinated into using an algebraic user interface would find an RPN interface easier to use. After learning to use an RPN interface, would anyone willingly go back to using an algebraic interface? I believe that marketing a very basic low-cost RPN style calculator, even if it weren't especially profitable in itself, would lay the groundwork for future sales and long-term profits. Unfortunately, corporations all too often sacrifice long-term profits for the sake of short-term profits. For those occasions when you're copying an algebraic formula, you can simply enclose it withing '' quotes to have an RPL calculator interpret it properly, and use parentheses if you're not sure of the precedence. You can have it display implied parentheses if you want to check on how it will treat an expression. So RPL calculators give you the best of both worlds. -- ==== > In message , David Davies Ayway the HP 28/48/49 style is not as good in keystrokes as the old system. > there is always a trade-off... > PS: Is there yet another way to do it? Yes. [p/r] + 7 * [p/r] 7 [enter] 2 [r/s] 3 [r/s] 4 [r/s] 5 [r/s] 6 [r/s] For a total of seventeen keystrokes... 10/10 for effort but [p/r] is two keystrokes[1] so that brings it up to > 19 - the same as mine. > ... [1] For the benefit of those without an HP-12C, [p/r] is a shifted > function. Earlier models (at least up to the HP41 series) had a standalone Program / Run switch or key, making it quite natural to record any repetitive sequence of keystrokes without going to the trouble of 'writing a program'. To someone used to working that way the repetitive use of + * cried out for immediate simplification. It's rather like recording Emacs keyboard macros instead of writing a Lisp function. Having the run/stop key next to the numeric keys helps too... dd. ==== Ummm.. actually no - it's not required on the 38G either. :-) > I can't remember exactly what I changed, but the compiler on the HP39G/HP48G has been changed to always accept argument without a closing parentheses. Now I have to admit that my memory is not as good as it used to be. I'm pretty sure that INTEGRAL (integral sign) on either the HP38 or HP48 you had to use a closing parenthesis. You don't have to on the HP39 or HP49. There are other cases like that. My mistake for POLYEVAL :) ==== I'm back from holidays and as I suspected when posting my little message all answers are correct, to the point, and informative. Worth G.E. ==== > Now compare symbolics, on a 49 (in RPN mode) it takes 35 keystrokes to type > in 6x + 5x^2 + 4x^3 + 3x^4 + 2x^5 + x^6 (with the x's), while in algebraic > mode, it takes only 26 keystrokes. That's less then three-quarters of what > it takes in RPN mode. I got 34 for both entry modes. You didn't count the 2 enter pushes > per term in the middle, right? If you do, you get 2*4 more pushes, > and that's not including the final Enter, which would bring the EQW > version to 35. I do have to admit, the entry was much more straightforward in EQW > mode though... I'm not sure what you mean by the 2 enter pushes, but I did not use the EQW for the algebraic mode, I actually switched it to algebraic mode :) It looks a lot different in that mode, a whole new world. I wasn't considering doing the factoring method because you can't do that with all polynominals. The POLYEVAL is a much better method for entering polynominals anyhow. ==== X > My niece, not quite middle-aged yet, seldom uses math for anything > more complicated than balancing her checkbook or calculating a > percentage. Recently, she was trying to add a column of a few hundred > figures with a calculator, and kept having to start over. She said I > hate calculators! I wish I had an adding machine!. I offered a 48GX, > showed her how to do basic arithmetic with it, and she got it done with > one try. Her comment was something like: Now this is how calculators > *should* work. X I once had to find a bug in a Cobol program, in year 1983 I guess, concerning of more than hundred numbers, which did not add up correctly. I first claimed memory for 1..126 (IIRC the #) leaving R0 as a counter. Then constructed a small storing program and immediately started to key in the numbers. When finished I coded a viewing program and viewed the results. As I have suspected, I have keyed in some incorrect numbers (four of them) and I quickly replaced them manually then viewed again, they were OK. Then I coded a simple adding loop and got the right answer. Hmmm... I could have never reliably keyed in 126 different numbers adding to a total that I could trust on without a calculator such as the HP 41CV that I had back then. more than hundred registers were needed and even some more for those simple programs. Well I have thus checked that there was no numerical problem, so back to Cobol: but everything was alright with a Cobol program: Read in some packed signed binaries and move to display field and add. Hmm.. What if I make an (unnecessary by the Cobol Handbook) extra mid-transfer to an unsigned binary (the numbers where all positive) and then to display-type field to add up? That solved the problem! My superior had hard time to believe that a new recruit, a rookie, could have found a Cobol bug in an IBM machine, but so it was! Oh - those early days. PS: The story was shortened for publishing here. ==== > On an AOS machine, the user has to use a lot of parenthesis to reach the > same level of confidence in the results than an RPN user. I think that's > the biggest advantage of RPN over AOS. > Actually I find by observing high school students that they seldom use > brackets on the 39G. rally they will evaluate part of the expression > something like 2+4 > ---- > 3+5 > would be done as 2+4 ENTER. Then 3+5 ENTER. Then copy result and > divide by copy result. X What? Do you claim that they used and Algebraic calculator to do things in RPN way?! Hah! That's what I have always suspected! Well, I'm glad I have all the options in my HP 49G - even mixed-mode oh - and the EQuation Writer, too! The only thing missing is a CALC mode command line .87la HP-71B ==== I have instaled libraries to 0 and I can not figure out how to delete them. I read the manuals explanation but I did not understand. Would someone please explain this to me? ==== dixon_ticonderogas schrieb > I have instaled libraries to 0 and I can not figure out how to delete > them. I read the manuals explanation but I did not understand. Would > someone please explain this to me? Use leftshift FILES, navigate into 0:IRAM, mark the library you want to delete and choose PURGE (on the second page of the menu, to be switched to with [NXT]-key). I think you should DETACH the library after purging it, but I am not shure. ..Heiko ==== > I think you should DETACH the library after purging it, but I am > not shure. > Why DETACH a purged lib? ;-))) Raymond BTW: I'm sure you meant the other way round: DETACH, then PURGE... ==== I was not familiar with the : : notation, but now I figured it out. ==== > I think you should DETACH the library after purging it, but I am > not shure. No, this job is done by the Filer automatically. In the worse case, you should detach the library BEFORE purging it otherwise you may get an error: Object in use ==== When i use variables in a matrix and invert the matrix i often get huge expressions inside the matrix. I have tried to do eval and simplify. The later works sometimes, but not all the time. If it's not possible to simplify, then i have a followup question. Is there an easy way to put the denumerator outside the matrix if the denumerator is the same for all elements? If you want to help me you can try this matrix: [['x+2' -4]['L1-2' 'L2+X+5]] Then invert it and you see the hell i'm trying to explain =) My machine is a HP49G with rom 1.19-6. // Jocke B ==== > When i use variables in a matrix and invert the matrix > i often get huge expressions inside the matrix. I have tried to do eval > and simplify. The later > works sometimes, but not all the time. If it's not possible to simplify, then i have a followup question. Is there > an easy way to put the denumerator outside the matrix if the denumerator is > the same for all elements? If you want to help me you can try this matrix: [['x+2' -4]['L1-2' 'L2+X+5]] Then invert it and you see the hell i'm trying to explain =) > My machine is a HP49G with rom 1.19-6. // Jocke B Multiply the inverse matrix by the determinant of the original matrix and then EXPAND that result. The final result will be the matrix of numerators, and the determinant will be the appropriate common denominator. In ral, a 2 by 2 matrix, M = [[a b ][ c d ]], with nonzero determinant D = a*d = b*c, has inverse INV(M) = [[d/D -b/D][ -c/D a/D ]] = [[d - b][ -c a]]/D ==== > Multiply the inverse matrix by the determinant of the original matrix and > then EXPAND that result. The final result will be the matrix of > numerators, and the determinant will be the appropriate common > denominator. In ral, a 2 by 2 matrix, M = [[a b ][ c d ]], with nonzero > determinant D = a*d = b*c, has inverse INV(M) = [[d/D -b/D][ -c/D a/D ]] > = [[d - b][ -c a]]/D > Okidokie... Thx! // Jocke ==== > Multiply the inverse matrix by the determinant of the original matrix and > then EXPAND that result. The final result will be the matrix of > numerators, and the determinant will be the appropriate common > denominator. In ral, a 2 by 2 matrix, M = [[a b ][ c d ]], with nonzero > determinant D = a*d = b*c, has inverse INV(M) = [[d/D -b/D][ -c/D a/D ]] > = [[d - b][ -c a]]/D > Okidokie... Thx! // Jocke Sorry, typo in last paragraph, D = a*d = b*c should be D = a*d - b*c ==== I have a 20 year old HP-41c with a bad segment in its display. I'm hoping to be able to take it apart and find something simple wrong with it. But, it's a mystery to me how the case comes apart. ==== the screws are under the four rubber feet. Be careful when tightening the screws, because the posts can be easily cracked by too much force. And, the frame between the upper and lower case fits only in one orientation, you will see;-) For more information, take a look at www.hpmuseum.org . There's a section about disassembling HP calculators. And they have a forum with many helpful people. Raymond Tom Keffer schrieb im Newsbeitrag > I have a 20 year old HP-41c with a bad segment in its display. I'm hoping > to be able to take it apart and find something simple wrong with it. But, > it's a mystery to me how the case comes apart. ==== Your description worked! -tk the screws are under the four rubber feet. > Be careful when tightening the screws, > because the posts can be easily cracked by too much force. ==== in a SysRPL library, how can i call a xNAME inside another xNAME like a subroutine call (GOSUB or GOTO) ? Jorge Luis ==== Please, see the examples in ML (machine language) for call to subrutines, in the Eric Rechlin Web site (www.hpcalc.org). The examples are written by Peter Geelhoed for HP-49G. Later you can call this subroutine from SysRPL. Miguel Angel CAPORALINI HERK (M.A.C.H.) **************************************************************************** **** in a SysRPL library, how can i call a xNAME inside another xNAME like > a subroutine call (GOSUB or GOTO) ? > Jorge Luis ==== normally, when you create a new xNAME, you also create a EXTERNAL x??? entry at the top of your source file (or in a .h file). for example: EXTERNAL xA EXTERNAL B xNAME A << .... > NULLNAME B << .... > then, any call to xA or B will be compiled in ROMPTR calls. > Please, see the examples in ML (machine language) for call to > subrutines, in the Eric Rechlin Web site (www.hpcalc.org). The > examples are written by Peter Geelhoed for HP-49G. > Later you can call this subroutine from SysRPL. > Miguel Angel CAPORALINI HERK (M.A.C.H.) > **************************************************************************** **** in a SysRPL library, how can i call a xNAME inside another xNAME like > a subroutine call (GOSUB or GOTO) ? > Jorge Luis Is it possible to access the CAS built in to the HP-39G ROM? My understanding is that the HP-39G has the same ROM as the HP-40G with CAS, but the CAS is not accessable on the HP-39G. The CAS is nearly identical to the HP-49G version 19-1. Any help here would be appreciated. ==== Last time I suggested someone to disable the IR, in order to gain access to the 40G CAS, the poor guy did it physically thus permanently damaged his 39G. You just have to figure out how to do it in software AND all by yourself... )-: > Is it possible to access the CAS built in to the HP-39G ROM? My understanding > is that the HP-39G has the same ROM as the HP-40G with CAS, but the CAS is > not accessable on the HP-39G. The CAS is nearly identical to the HP-49G > version 19-1. Any help here would be appreciated. ==== > You just have to figure out how to do it in software > AND all by yourself... )-: A dilated fear. HPCC #1046 ==== If this the wrong group: My apologies. In HP41 user library there was a HP 16C emulator, but i can't find it anywhere. As it seems that HP has released all applications: Does anyone know where to find it? Would it be possible to post it? Was it any good :) /Johan ==== I don't know that emulator, but maybe someone in the forum of www.hpmuseum.org , which is the right place for these things;-( Raymond Johan Granlund schrieb im Newsbeitrag > If this the wrong group: My apologies. > In HP41 user library there was a HP 16C emulator, but i can't find it > anywhere. As it seems that HP has released all applications: Does anyone know where to find it? Would it be possible to post it? Was it any good :) > /Johan ==== Still trying hard to get up to speed I find myself wanting to get J. > Donelly's HP 48 Handbook and/or the Introduction to HP48 System RPL and > Assembly Language Programming. However, these seem hopelessly out of print. > Anyone know of a source from where they can be bought (if even perhaps as > photocopies). I'm East U.S. based, but if an European retailer has it, I > can still try buying from them... Best, > Eduardo I am just getting back into the HP48 - doesn't HP sell their own stuff somewhere? ==== this is what is left: http://www.shopping.hp.com/cgi-bin/hpdirect/shopping/scripts/product_detail/ product_detail_view.jsp?product_code=48GX%23ABA&script_name=product.cgi you can find make elctronic books here: http://www.hpcalc.org/hp48/docs/programming/ > Still trying hard to get up to speed I find myself wanting to get J. > Donelly's HP 48 Handbook and/or the Introduction to HP48 System RPL and > Assembly Language Programming. However, these seem hopelessly out of print. > Anyone know of a source from where they can be bought (if even perhaps as > photocopies). I'm East U.S. based, but if an European retailer has it, I > can still try buying from them... Best, > Eduardo I am just getting back into the HP48 - doesn't HP sell their own stuff > somewhere? ==== I normally don't post these type of messages on newsgroup boards, but given the nature of this particular item and the fact that it is no longer produced I hope is enough of an exception to anyone who is offended. If not, my apologies for breaking protocol; please delete this message. I am moving to California, so I am selling all of my calculators, computers, textbooks, etc. This is a HP48G bundled with several books: the User's Guide, Algebra and Pre-Calculus on the HP48G, Calculus Investigations with the HP-48G/GX, and HP48G/GX Investigations in Mathematics. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=11713&item=3022621059 &rd=1 ==== > I am moving to California, so I am selling all of my calculators, > computers, textbooks, etc. Aren't you allowed to think anymore once you move to California? ==== > Aren't you allowed to think anymore once you move to California? Well, it's not too far from Texas :) ==== Aren't you allowed to think anymore once you move to California? Well, it's not too far from Texas :) LOL :-) Around here, denizens of both of those states have their fair share of jokes told about them. -- ==== > Aren't you allowed to think anymore once you move to California? Well, it's not too far from Texas :) LOL :-) Around here, denizens of both of those states have their fair share of > jokes told about them. -- > ==== I was doing some trigonomtetry. I typed in SIN(2*pi). It should be zero, but it gets 4.135230074713E-13. Why does it do this? My ti-83, ti-89, and hp-49 all give the sin of 2(pi) to be 0. I dont like the built in grapher. I noticed that hpcalc.or had several. Which one is best? I dont need anything except the x y plots. ==== > I was doing some trigonomtetry. I typed in SIN(2*pi). It should be > zero, but it gets 4.135230074713E-13. Why does it do this? Because the 48 series evaluates SIN(2*pi) numerically. The closest 12 significant digit approximation of pi is 3.14159265359, and when that's multiplied by 2, the result is 6.28318530718, which is used as the argument for SIN. The SIN command isn't arrogant enough to assume that you really meant exactly 2 times pi when it gets 6.28318530718 as an argument; it just returns the closest numerical approximation to SIN(6.2831530718). It's part of the design philosophy of HP calculators to not make any assumptions that an argument really means anything other than what it is. It's up to the user to recognize that 4.13523074713E-13 is approximately 0. > My ti-83, > ti-89, and hp-49 all give the sin of 2(pi) to be 0. Strange; my 49G returns 4.13523074713E-13, but perhaps there's some flag that tells it to treat pi symbolically, as an exact value instead of a numerical approximation. I guess that the TIs would be doing the same. -- ==== > Strange; my 49G returns 4.13523074713E-13, but perhaps > there's some flag that tells it to treat pi symbolically, > as an exact value instead of a numerical approximation. I > guess that the TIs would be doing the same. For 'SIN(2*pi)', my hp49 gives 0 in exact mode and 4.13523074713E-13 in approximate mode . ==== > Strange; my 49G returns 4.13523074713E-13, but perhaps > there's some flag that tells it to treat pi symbolically, > as an exact value instead of a numerical approximation. I > guess that the TIs would be doing the same. For 'SIN(2*pi)', my hp49 gives 0 in exact mode and > 4.13523074713E-13 in approximate mode . Erable on the 48 returns 0, which is to be expected since the 49 CAS is based on Erable. -- Wayne Brown | When your tail's in a crack, you improvise fwbrown@bellsouth.net | if you're good enough. Otherwise you give | your pelt to the trapper. e^(i*pi) = -1 -- Euler | -- John Myers Myers, Silverlock ==== > Erable on the 48 returns 0, which is to be expected since the 49 CAS is > based on Erable. Yes, Wayne: 0 in exact mode, and 4.13523074713E-13 in approx. mode. Just as expected. ==== > Erable on the 48 returns 0, which is to be expected since the 49 CAS is > based on Erable. > Yes, Wayne: 0 in exact mode, and 4.13523074713E-13 in approx. mode. > Just as expected. How did you do it in approx. mode? I set it to APPROX with ERCFG but it switches back to EXACT every time I do SIN(2*pi). -- Wayne Brown | When your tail's in a crack, you improvise fwbrown@bellsouth.net | if you're good enough. Otherwise you give | your pelt to the trapper. e^(i*pi) = -1 -- Euler | -- John Myers Myers, Silverlock ==== How did you do it in approx. mode? I set it to APPROX with ERCFG but > it switches back to EXACT every time I do SIN(2*pi). Put on the stack: 'SIN(2*PI)' and ->NUM (Right Shift ENTER) ==== Changing flag two also makes it do the same as the hp 48. ==== How did you do it in approx. mode? I set it to APPROX with ERCFG but > it switches back to EXACT every time I do SIN(2*pi). > Put on the stack: 'SIN(2*PI)' and ->NUM (Right Shift ENTER) On my 48GX, (Right Shift ENTER) brings up the Matrix editor. (Left Shift EVAL) does ->NUM and gives the expected result, but that's not using Erable, is it? That give me the same result as an out-of-the-box 48 without Erable. With the User keys turned on, (Left Shift EVAL) gives me XNUM, which produces SIN(6.28318530718) and then EVAL gives 4.13523074713E-13. Before I was setting APPROX mode with ERCFG, putting SIN(2*PI) on the stack and then EXPAND. Every time, it returned 0 and changed back to EXACT mode. Now, after playing around with it a bit, clearing memory and restoring from a backup, and trying again, EXPAND give me SIN(6.28318530718) every time, whether in EXACT or APPROX mode; but it still changes APPROX back to EXACT. I can't figure out a way to get 0 from EXPAND any more. This is very confusing. There must be other flags involved, but I don't know what they are. Clearly, I'm an Erable novice! -- Wayne Brown | When your tail's in a crack, you improvise fwbrown@bellsouth.net | if you're good enough. Otherwise you give | your pelt to the trapper. e^(i*pi) = -1 -- Euler | -- John Myers Myers, Silverlock ==== Before I was setting APPROX mode with ERCFG, putting SIN(2*PI) on the > stack and then EXPAND. Every time, it returned 0 and changed back > to EXACT mode. Now, after playing around with it a bit, clearing > memory and restoring from a backup, and trying again, EXPAND give me > SIN(6.28318530718) every time, whether in EXACT or APPROX mode; but it > still changes APPROX back to EXACT. I can't figure out a way to get > 0 from EXPAND any more. This is very confusing. There must be other > flags involved, but I don't know what they are. Clearly, I'm an Erable novice! I use the next program as my own XQ2 command, for set the exact mode: .82 { 12 14 15 } SF -2 CF IFERR QPI THEN END .8e (You can use XQ instead QPI if you prefer). As you can see, there *is* other flags involved, from Erable and from the hp system. For setting the approx. mode I use the original Erable XNUM I'm sure this will help you. ==== > I use the next program as my own XQ2 command, for set the exact mode: > .82 { 12 14 15 } SF -2 > CF > IFERR QPI > THEN > END > .8e > (You can use XQ instead QPI if you prefer). As you can see, there *is* > other flags involved, from Erable and from the hp system. > For setting the approx. mode I use the original Erable XNUM > I'm sure this will help you. -- Wayne Brown | When your tail's in a crack, you improvise fwbrown@bellsouth.net | if you're good enough. Otherwise you give | your pelt to the trapper. e^(i*pi) = -1 -- Euler | -- John Myers Myers, Silverlock ==== Strange; my 49G returns 4.13523074713E-13, but perhaps > there's some flag that tells it to treat pi symbolically, > as an exact value instead of a numerical approximation. I > guess that the TIs would be doing the same. For 'SIN(2*pi)', my hp49 gives 0 in exact mode and > 4.13523074713E-13 in approximate mode . So does mine, as I expected that it would. It did occur to me, and I (thought that) I had tried exact mode before posting. I can only guess that maybe I released the RightShift key before pressing the ->NUM key, and failed to notice that the ~ in the status area hadn't changed to an =. I guess that my brain was low on glucose or sleep, or perhaps both (no lack of caffeine). But of course exact versus approximate mode is indeed controlled by some flag, so I suppose that I wasn't entirely wrong. As I believe someone else mentioned, setting either flag -2 or -3 would also cause pi to be evaluated numerically, but I normally don't have either of these set on my calculators. -- ==== > So does mine, as I expected that it would. It did occur to me, and I > (thought that) I had tried exact mode before posting. I can only guess > that maybe I released the RightShift key before pressing the ->NUM key, > and failed to notice that the ~ in the status area hadn't changed to You do not have to switch your calculator to approximate mode in order to get a numerical result. RightShift + ENTER pressed simultaneously will switch the mode between approximate and exact. However, pressing just RightShift then ENTER will call ->NUM which gives a numerical result no matter what mode you're in ==== So does mine, as I expected that it would. It did occur to me, and I > (thought that) I had tried exact mode before posting. I can only guess > that maybe I released the RightShift key before pressing the ->NUM key, > and failed to notice that the ~ in the status area hadn't changed to You do not have to switch your calculator to approximate mode in order to > get a numerical result. > RightShift + ENTER pressed simultaneously will switch the mode between > approximate and exact. However, pressing just RightShift then ENTER will > call ->NUM which gives a numerical result no matter what mode you're in Yes, I'm well aware of that. What I was trying to do was get a symbolic result. -- ==== I am wondering if someone has an old code for a 20 years old SONY tv (for rem34bg). Tal ==== Some questions about hp48 C++ cross-compiler: Did anyone find it useful ? (MinGW32). xgcc: No such file or directory (but I have it in /usr/bin) Under MinGW32 (when trying to make samples): Making examples... make[1]: Entering directory `/saturn-local-hp48/samples/float' xgcc -Wall -O2 -c -o mandel.o mandel.c 0 [main] make 2468 proc_subproc: Couldn't duplicate my handle<0x3C> for pi d 2488, Win32 error 6 xgcc.exe: No input files make[1]: *** [mandel.o] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/saturn-local-hp48/samples/float' make: *** [all] Error 1 I have read somewhere that it requires Cygwin (but i think that it should also work under MinGW) . -- Vojtech Sazel --- Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). ==== How about learning RPL? Maybe it would make some things easier;-) Raymond Vojtech Sazel schrieb im Newsbeitrag > Some questions about hp48 C++ cross-compiler: > Did anyone find it useful ? > (MinGW32). xgcc: No such file or directory (but I have it in /usr/bin) Under MinGW32 (when trying to make samples): > Making examples... > make[1]: Entering directory `/saturn-local-hp48/samples/float' > xgcc -Wall -O2 -c -o mandel.o mandel.c > 0 [main] make 2468 proc_subproc: Couldn't duplicate my handle<0x3C for pi > d 2488, Win32 error 6 > xgcc.exe: No input files > make[1]: *** [mandel.o] Error 1 > make[1]: Leaving directory `/saturn-local-hp48/samples/float' > make: *** [all] Error 1 I have read somewhere that it requires Cygwin (but i think that it should > also work under MinGW) . -- > Vojtech Sazel > --- > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). ==== I had to find the derivative of tan(x) on my HP49, and while it was on the stack, I idly pressed INTVX, thinking I'd get tan(x) back again. Instead, it returned 'tan(x)-atan(tan(x))'. I could see by inspection that this evaluates to tan(x), but simplifiers like SIMPLIFLY, TSIMP, EXPAND, COLCT and so on just made the expression more and more complicated. They couldn't seem to grasp that atan(tan(x)) = x. I tried the same thing on my HP48 and it returned yet another large antiderivative, but ALG48's ASIM converted it to tan(x), right away. A flag setting, maybe? (I had 'Principal value' selected.) Bill Curious Markwick Toronto, Canada ==== > I had to find the derivative of tan(x) on my HP49, and while it was on > the stack, I idly pressed INTVX, thinking I'd get tan(x) back again. > Instead, it returned 'tan(x)-atan(tan(x))'. There's no reason you should expect that the integral of a derivative to give you back exactly the original function. At the very least the integral of the derivative can differ from the original function by any arbitrarily chosen constant. > I could see by inspection that this evaluates to tan(x), but > simplifiers like SIMPLIFLY, TSIMP, EXPAND, COLCT and so on just made > the expression more and more complicated. They couldn't seem to grasp > that atan(tan(x)) = x. Well, that's certainly not true for all x; it would only be true for -pi/2 < x < pi/2. Even assuming you can make that simplification, tan(x)-x is rather a different function than tan(x). Since I get d/dx tan(x) = tan(x)^2+1 (which could also be simplified to sec(x)^2 = 1/cos(x)^2), it is interesting that int(tan(x)^2,x) can be simplified to tan(x)-x, which makes it look as if INTVX is forgetting to deal with that '+1'. > I tried the same thing on my HP48 and it returned yet another large > antiderivative, but ALG48's ASIM converted it to tan(x), right away. A flag setting, maybe? (I had 'Principal value' selected.) My HP 48SX with ALG48 and the INTGR library also produces the less confusing (and arguably more correct) result. -- Steve VanDevender I ride the big iron http://jcomm.uoregon.edu/~stevev Little things break, circuitry burns / Time flies while my little world turns Every day comes, every day goes / 100 years and nobody shows -- Happy Rhodes ==== I had to find the derivative of tan(x) on my HP49, and while it was on > the stack, I idly pressed INTVX, thinking I'd get tan(x) back again. > Instead, it returned 'tan(x)-atan(tan(x))'. You must have a defiective calculator then. Mine returns 'TAN(X)-ATAN(TAN(X))+X' That extra +X on the end is important. ==== I had to find the derivative of tan(x) on my HP49, and while it was on > the stack, I idly pressed INTVX, thinking I'd get tan(x) back again. > Instead, it returned 'tan(x)-atan(tan(x))'. There's no reason you should expect that the integral of a derivative to > give you back exactly the original function. At the very least the > integral of the derivative can differ from the original function by any > arbitrarily chosen constant. I could see by inspection that this evaluates to tan(x), but > simplifiers like SIMPLIFLY, TSIMP, EXPAND, COLCT and so on just made > the expression more and more complicated. They couldn't seem to grasp > that atan(tan(x)) = x. Well, that's certainly not true for all x; it would only be true for > -pi/2 < x < pi/2. Even assuming you can make that simplification, tan(x)-x is rather a > different function than tan(x). Since I get d/dx tan(x) = tan(x)^2+1 (which could also be simplified to > sec(x)^2 = 1/cos(x)^2), it is interesting that int(tan(x)^2,x) can be > simplified to tan(x)-x, which makes it look as if INTVX is forgetting > to deal with that '+1'. I tried the same thing on my HP48 and it returned yet another large > antiderivative, but ALG48's ASIM converted it to tan(x), right away. A flag setting, maybe? (I had 'Principal value' selected.) My HP 48SX with ALG48 and the INTGR library also produces the less > confusing (and arguably more correct) result. When I did it on the 49 ROM 1.19-6, I got 'TAN(X)-ATAN(TAN(X))+X'. It wouldn't simplify it down any more than that. Like Steve said, that would be presumptuous on the part of the calculator. --CS ==== I had to find the derivative of tan(x) on my HP49, and while it was on > the stack, I idly pressed INTVX, thinking I'd get tan(x) back again. > Instead, it returned 'tan(x)-atan(tan(x))'. > There's no reason you should expect that the integral of a derivative to > give you back exactly the original function. At the very least the > integral of the derivative can differ from the original function by any > arbitrarily chosen constant. I could see by inspection that this evaluates to tan(x), but > simplifiers like SIMPLIFLY, TSIMP, EXPAND, COLCT and so on just made > the expression more and more complicated. They couldn't seem to grasp > that atan(tan(x)) = x. Well, that's certainly not true for all x; it would only be true for > -pi/2 < x < pi/2. > Even assuming you can make that simplification, tan(x)-x is rather a > different function than tan(x). Since I get d/dx tan(x) = tan(x)^2+1 (which could also be simplified to > sec(x)^2 = 1/cos(x)^2), it is interesting that int(tan(x)^2,x) can be > simplified to tan(x)-x, which makes it look as if INTVX is forgetting > to deal with that '+1'. I tried the same thing on my HP48 and it returned yet another large > antiderivative, but ALG48's ASIM converted it to tan(x), right away. A flag setting, maybe? (I had 'Principal value' selected.) > My HP 48SX with ALG48 and the INTGR library also produces the less > confusing (and arguably more correct) result. ********************************************************** > When I did it on the 49 ROM 1.19-6, I got 'TAN(X)-ATAN(TAN(X))+X'. It > wouldn't simplify it down any more than that. Like Steve said, that > would be presumptuous on the part of the calculator. --CS ==== Ideally, the order of operations should not matter, although you may have to simplify the result to get back the same form of the original expression. Naturally, the TI-89 has no trouble with this... as rcobo can now confirm ;-) -- Bhuvanesh ==== I had to find the derivative of tan(x) on my HP49, and while it was on > the stack, I idly pressed INTVX, thinking I'd get tan(x) back again. > Instead, it returned 'tan(x)-atan(tan(x))'. > Or write SIN(X)/COS(X) instead of TAN and do DERVX then INTVX. ==== After a semester of Pre-Calc where I was forced to use a TI-83 (ughhh!!!), I am glad to be taking Calculus this summer where I can go back to my HP49. I was wondering if any of you veterans had any helpful suggestions on using the CAS handles basic integrations and derivatives pretty well. Are there any programs that would be useful? I did a search at hpcalc.org and found a few programs like Calc1 and Approximate Integration. Has anyone used any of these programs? How useful were they? Also, how well does the Step by Step mode work on the HP49? Are there any quirks that I should aware of ? I guess most of my questions will be answered by just by use and trial and error, but any help that you could give would be appreciated? Dave ==== I do have a very important suggestion: Keep the calculator in rectangular mode. Especially for Calc II. When I took Calc II, I was also taking Statics, and we were switching between rectangular and cylindrical regularly. We were learning to work with vectors. Anyway, I was doing calculus homework, and I tried to use my 49 to do some simple trig integrals. The answers I got were absolutely the most confusing strings of algebra I have ever seen. It took me a month (I didn't know about this newsgroup) to figure out what I had done to screw up my calculator. As it would turn out, when you change it to cylindrical mode, it changes the entire calculator. This includes the way it handles algebraic expressions. I've tried to duplicate this recently, and I couldn't. I've upgraded my ROM (from 1.16 to 1.19-6) since then, maybe that did something. I actually used this as a point for why HP's are better than TI's. When you change the modes, they are global. They affect the entire calculator. As far as I know, the 49 does a fine job with approximating integrals. You will probably be a lot better off if you get Urroz's books though. These books will teach you how to program your calculator. My Diff Eq professor made the final exam entirely about numerical methods. He suggested that we program our calculators to use the four numerical methods that we were covering. He told us that if we learned to program our calculators to do this for us, we could finish the test in 20 minutes, and get 100% on the test. I programmed my 49 in UserRPL and was out of there in 15 minutes, and got 110% on the test. Mine was the only perfect score. I was able to do this easily in UserRPL, once I learned how unbelievably easy it was. You just give the calculator the same commands you would normally give it whne you are performing the calculations. I was also able to help people do this on their TI's (I never truly loved my HP until I programmed a TI). The TI's programming language worked a lot like C++, which was fortunate (but it still wasn't UserRPL). I believe that the TI-83 works more like basic, which is a pain. Visit this newsgroup often. The people here are very helpful. Also, you can with a 49, so I understand how difficult getting calculator help can be. BTW: The TI-83 isn't all bad, it definitely has a better matrix editor than the 89 does. If you're an engineering student, that will be very important because you will be solving a lot of systems of linear equations. The 49 beats any TI on equation solvers though. --CS ==== > I actually used this as a point for why HP's are better than TI's. When you > change the modes, they are global. They affect the entire calculator. Eh? It's the same on the TI's. > The 49 beats any TI on equation solvers though. strong points are limits/series and integrals. -- Bhuvanesh ==== > you will be solving a lot of systems of linear equations. The 49 beats any TI > on equation solvers though. --CS No. Systems of equations in my opinion are one the 49s weaknesses. On the ti-89 you just type in the equations and tell it which variable to solve for and it does. The 49 cannot do this. ==== 49 starts doing strange things. I have noticed that some of the modes seem to change unexpectedly. I've got Urroz's first book for the 49, so I guess it's time for the second one. I will also brush up on my UserRPL. My backup calculator is an HP48 (which I have the manuals for), so I'm not totally lost when it comes to the 49. But, I have noticed a few quirks and have gotten some unexpected (but not algebraically wrong) answers on the 49. Fortunately, I use the CAS to check my answers rather than give them to me, so I can usually interpret the results back to a textbook answer. I really didn't hate the TI-83+. It was fairly good at what it did, it just didn't do enough. It was only $20-40(US) cheaper than my HP48G and HP49G, but it didn't come close to the functionality of either. I will admit that the TI83 was better at graphing. It was easier to setup and seemed to draw the graphs faster than my HPs. One day I might get hold of a TI89 and compare it to the HP49 first hand. ==== > you will be solving a lot of systems of linear equations. The 49 beats any TI > on equation solvers though. --CS No. Systems of equations in my opinion are one the 49s weaknesses. > On the ti-89 you just type in the equations and tell it which variable > to solve for and it does. The 49 cannot do this. ??? Mine can do that just fine, both numerically and symbolically. Can you give us an example? ==== > you will be solving a lot of systems of linear equations. The 49 beats any TI > on equation solvers though. --CS No. Systems of equations in my opinion are one the 49s weaknesses. > On the ti-89 you just type in the equations and tell it which variable > to solve for and it does. The 49 cannot do this. I usually put all the relevant EQuations in variables like 'Vol=W*H*L' 'VOL.EQ' STO 'Q=a*t^2+b*t' 'Q.EQ' STO and then combine them into a list: { VOL.EQ Q.EQ } 'EQ' STO which I store into the SOLVER reserved variable EQ then I start it by 30 MENU | Vol | W | H | L |EXPR=| NXEQ| I key in, say 5_yd 3_yd 2_yd 1_l (yes, liter) and press enter to see them in stack, then I press the keys | Vol | W | H | L | and finally [Left-Shift] |Vol| for the first solving . Then I change any of the measures in the box (in feet, this time) and solve for any other variable. ***Note: The initial 1_l for Vol was to let the solver know the unit I was using for that Volume solved. NOW! I challenge *ANY* TI calculator to do that out of the box!!! HP Numeric Solve with Units > any TI and that is it, folks (and the alien Bhuv :) ==== I've recently been experiencing something a little worrying on my HP49G calculator (recently purchased. Serial code CN1500...). As I turn the contrast up - the lcd begins to show (progressively), a kind of rippled pattern of sorts (not a great description... but the artifact is more or less abstract: hard to explain). [I could upload a photograph if need be] It seems as if the affected pixels have their contrast higher than their neighboring pixels - not sure if this is accurate. The symptoms appear over approximately 40% of the screen (dispersed - but tending toward the upper right). This is only really visible when the contrast is set rather high... or when (by regular operation), the screen happens to be black (like when selecting an item in a menu: the highlighted menu item will show a black background). Since the moment I bought it, the calculator has not once been dropped or placed in any kind of unusual environment. I keep it with its plastic protector clipped on; inside an HP48 soft case; inside another padded carry case. I always have the serial port covered with tape. I've read through past posts and come across several occurrences that seem to be similar to my own - but none of them supplied a definitive (or helpful) answer. Today I tried removing the batteries for several hours (just to see if it might make a difference), and it did not. I will now leave the calculator without batteries for a full day and see. This might seem odd - but I have the distinct impression that this began to happen after I viewed some of the grayscale images through the self-test menu. The symptoms were absolutely not present when I first purchased the calculator. If they began to occur sporadically - they certainly were made more easilly apparent by these grayscale images. Are there any suggestions? Is this cause for worry to begin with? Lastly - is this perhaps some kind of known side-effect from grayscale image viewing? When I view the afore-mentioned pictures, the display stutters and is visibly refreshing (I assume this is entirely normal)? HP - is that I know the local supplier is out of 49G stock and they'd likely know less about any possible problems than some of the members here, anyway. Side-note for those interested: The CN1500... that I own has noticeably more comfortable buttons (easier to push) than another 49G that I have tried (didn't check serial). Buttons are responsive and *very* seldom go without registering a push. No rainbow effect. Screen window scratches very easily (though I can't compare... perhaps earlier models were even more easily scratched ^^) eshylay ==== X > As I turn the contrast up - the lcd begins to show (progressively), a kind > of rippled pattern of sorts (not a great description... but the artifact > is more or less abstract: hard to explain). [I could upload a photograph if > need be] X I would not worry, but a link to your web-page where we could see the photos would be very nice OR if you don't have a web-page then maybe Father Joe would allow you to use his page, he seems to be collecting pictures of the HP 49G displayså in various conditions of light sources etc. (this is my idea) ask Joe: http://www.holyjoe.net/hobbies.htm > Side-note for those interested: The CN1500... that I own has noticeably more > comfortable buttons (easier to push) than another 49G that I have tried > (didn't check serial). Buttons are responsive and *very* seldom go without > registering a push. No rainbow effect. Screen window scratches very easily > (though I can't compare... perhaps earlier models were even more easily > scratched ^^) Nice to here that you are very satisfied (-: ==== I've posted an image to http://home.mweb.co.za/mw/mwpooch/49LCD.jpg. Not the clearest photograph - but it shows the problem (?) effectively. My question now is this: Is the same thing present on all 49G calculators... ie. is this normal? Should I be worried enough to contact my local HP support? The affected pixels appear to always be the same pixels: ie. - the problem doesn't seem to move around. Viewing the LCD from different angles also makes no change. Lastly: left calc without batteries for 15+ hours; also to no avail. I've had the calculator now for only 4 months: am going to be seriously annoyed if something is already wrong with it. This especially considering they'll not likely be able to switch it out right now if something is wrong. Anyway, there's the photo. I await your opinion ^^ eshylay ==== > I keep it with its plastic >protector clipped on; inside an HP48 soft case; inside another padded carry >case. I always have the serial port covered with tape. gee.... and I thought I was fussy with mine.... ...unless you live by the sea, or in a dessert or jungle... why such extreme precautions ??? these calculators are supposed to be RUGGED.... and almost indestructible... for some weird reason... I always find that when I get too overly fussy, something goes wrong.... or else some accident occurs. I certainly dont fuss like I used to..... and I enjoy life a whole lot more.... Just my 0.02 worth.... ==== Sorry! I cannot access that URL, are you sure about spelling? Can you use somebody else's PC to ensure it works from the outside world, too? I've posted an image to > http://home.mweb.co.za/mw/mwpooch/49LCD.jpg. X ==== The link worked 12 hours ago but not now. ed > Sorry! > I cannot access that URL, are you sure about spelling? > Can you use somebody else's PC to ensure it works > from the outside world, too? I've posted an image to > http://home.mweb.co.za/mw/mwpooch/49LCD.jpg. > X ==== >Sorry! >I cannot access that URL, are you sure about spelling? >Can you use somebody else's PC to ensure it works >from the outside world, too? OTOH, I haven't seen that pattern in my 49. SOmetimes there are vertical lines that are a little darker, but not this kind of diagonal pattern. -- ==== Sorry about the trouble with the URL, it seems you had some bad timing: my ISP (who hosts the file) is having some difficulties... erm... working :) I've uploaded to another address: http://chaosproject.netfirms.com/49LCD.jpg If there is any other problem, just let me know and I will 20kb). eshylay ==== It worked now! I've never seen that before?! Can't help you on this one. Read the other answers and go figure if you can (I surely can't) ???? > The link worked 12 hours ago but not now. ed > Sorry! > I cannot access that URL, are you sure about spelling? > Can you use somebody else's PC to ensure it works > from the outside world, too? I've posted an image to > http://home.mweb.co.za/mw/mwpooch/49LCD.jpg. > X ==== Well thanks for the help. Contacted HP today and they said they'd swap it out once they have stock. As expected, that is not currently the case. Apparently a world wide 49G shortage. Ahem. We'll see when it happens - the sales woman advised that stock may be arriving in a week or two. I'll believe it when I see it - either way I'm somewhat peeved that something is alreay wrong with my lovely calculator. So long as they sort it out - I'll forgive :) Anyway, - again: appreciated you taking a look. eshylay ==== Dear Eshylay. My almost new'n'out-of-the-box HP49 has exactly the same problem (I would discard the theory that you did anything wrong to trigger the problem.) Serial CN148... so produced a couple of weeks before yours. If you want, I can upload pics to compare. Problem may be slightly less severe in mine than in yours, but it's obviously the same artifact. You mentioned you contacted HP for a replacement (eventually...). Maybe I will, too. I'm shaky about the LCD quality at this point. Eduardo ==== Sorry to hear I'm not the only one then :s... No need to post pictures (unless you specifically want me to look and compare?). I'll see what my local HP says about the problem when I hand the calculator in - see if they want to exchange or repair something in particular. I'm just worried that the problem will get worse. Otherwise, even, the amount of money that I paid for the unit was considerable (especially considering my... erm... budget ^^)... I want to make sure I've got something that isn't even mildly faulty. Speak to your local office and see what they suggest. eshylay ==== X > My almost new'n'out-of-the-box HP49 has exactly the same problem (I would > discard the theory that you did anything wrong to trigger the problem.) > Serial CN148... so produced a couple of weeks before yours. If you want, I > can upload pics to compare. Problem may be slightly less severe in mine > than in yours, but it's obviously the same artifact. X ==== I've just uploaded the pics for everyone's viewing pleasure: http://ivwnet.com/~eduenez@ivwnet.com/ Somehow the pics don't do justice. My digicam isn't great and it's very hard to get the illumination/flash right for the details to be perceived. The best one is http://ivwnet.com/~eduenez@ivwnet.com/PICT0106small.JPG So enjoy. Eduardo ==== Now I'm confused. Visited an electronics store today and (for interest) took a look at the one calculator they actually had in stock: a 48GX. When adjusting the contrast high, the same thing - again - seemed to occur with the LCD. The 48GX produced the error far less visibly than my own (something more like Eduardo's pictures present). Now - honestly - what are the chances that the single 48 in store; the only other LCD I have physically looked at in a good while - would present the same problem? Please - I would like to hear some more thoughts on this. *IS* it normal? I'm only going to get a chance to drive to my HP dealer in a couple weeks since I'm now one week from exams... so there is no other way for me to be sure. Please take a look at my images and Eduardo's and simply see if the same thing presents itself on your own calculator. alright? - or is this kind of a random draw thing? If something -is- faulty, I would insist on a replacement - I am a student and put a great deal of money down for this calculator. Even the peace of mind that this is normal would make me happy :)... I just don't want to have to worry that 2 months after my warranty expires - I'm suddenly stuck with the LCD that decided to finally kick it altogether. Opinions -much- appreciated! In the least, please let me know if your display looks eshylay ==== Eshylay: I have a 48GX too and its display does *not* present the same problem. In fact, it seems to be of excellent quality. Also, judging from previous responses, the effect is either not noticeable or absent from other people's calculators. Maybe this flaw is to be considered normal in calculators produced using a certain type of LCD (perhaps provided by a less-than-optimal third-party manufacturer of parts during a certain period?). It does seem like your 49G's display is worse than mine but my display looks worse than the pics reveal (at relatively high contrast levels only). In any case, even if nondefective, it's poor quality. At least I'm somewhat at ease that my calc doesn't have the *capacitor* problem... With the shortage of replacement calcs and the *arguable* normalcy of these flawed displays I'm debating whether asking for a warranty replacement would get me far at all. If you are dissatisfied with the quality and feel you are getting less than you expect, go for it. It's not like these are giveaway products! It is HP we're talking about here (specially HP prices, if anything's left from the original company.) Eduardo > Now I'm confused. Visited an electronics store today and (for interest) took a look at the one > calculator they actually had in stock: a 48GX. When adjusting the contrast high, the same thing - again - seemed to occur > with the LCD. > The 48GX produced the error far less visibly than my own (something more > like Eduardo's > pictures present). > Now - honestly - what are the chances that the single 48 in store; the only > other LCD I have > physically looked at in a good while - would present the same problem? Please - I would like to hear some more thoughts on this. *IS* it normal? > I'm only going > to get a chance to drive to my HP dealer in a couple weeks since I'm now one > week from > exams... so there is no other way for me to be sure. Please take a look at my images and Eduardo's and simply see if the same > thing presents > itself on your own calculator. > also > alright? - > or is this kind of a random draw thing? If something -is- faulty, I would insist on a replacement - I am a student > and put a great > deal of money down for this calculator. Even the peace of mind that this is > normal would > make me happy :)... I just don't want to have to worry that 2 months after > my warranty > expires - I'm suddenly stuck with the LCD that decided to finally kick it > altogether. Opinions -much- appreciated! In the least, please let me know if your > display looks ==== I was just wondering if that effect is visible all the time, or only under neon lights or other intermitent lights. Have you try under direct sun light? > Eshylay: I have a 48GX too and its display does *not* present the same problem. In > fact, it seems to be of excellent quality. Also, judging from previous > responses, the effect is either not noticeable or absent from other people's > calculators. Maybe this flaw is to be considered normal in calculators > produced using a certain type of LCD (perhaps provided by a > less-than-optimal third-party manufacturer of parts during a certain > period?). It does seem like your 49G's display is worse than mine but my > display looks worse than the pics reveal (at relatively high contrast levels > only). In any case, even if nondefective, it's poor quality. At least I'm > somewhat at ease that my calc doesn't have the *capacitor* problem... With > the shortage of replacement calcs and the *arguable* normalcy of these > flawed displays I'm debating whether asking for a warranty replacement would > get me far at all. If you are dissatisfied with the quality and feel you are getting less than > you expect, go for it. It's not like these are giveaway products! It is HP > we're talking about here (specially HP prices, if anything's left from the > original company.) Eduardo Now I'm confused. Visited an electronics store today and (for interest) took a look at the > one > calculator they actually had in stock: a 48GX. When adjusting the contrast high, the same thing - again - seemed to occur > with the LCD. > The 48GX produced the error far less visibly than my own (something more > like Eduardo's > pictures present). > Now - honestly - what are the chances that the single 48 in store; the > only > other LCD I have > physically looked at in a good while - would present the same problem? Please - I would like to hear some more thoughts on this. *IS* it normal? > I'm only going > to get a chance to drive to my HP dealer in a couple weeks since I'm now > one > week from > exams... so there is no other way for me to be sure. Please take a look at my images and Eduardo's and simply see if the same > thing presents > itself on your own calculator. also > alright? - > or is this kind of a random draw thing? If something -is- faulty, I would insist on a replacement - I am a student > and put a great > deal of money down for this calculator. Even the peace of mind that this > is > normal would > make me happy :)... I just don't want to have to worry that 2 months after > my warranty > expires - I'm suddenly stuck with the LCD that decided to finally kick it > altogether. Opinions -much- appreciated! In the least, please let me know if your > display looks > ==== I have an HP49g calc and I'm wondering if there is any source code for programs for it? I use to have an HP48gx that had the eq-lib as well as equation solver and would like to acquire them again. I don't have my own computer, so I'm not able to download any programs from any site. There doesn't seem to be much useful information on the web regarding HP49gx any more. ==== <37c22b16.0305031059.72efcd82@posting.google.com>, > I have an HP49g calc and I'm wondering if there is any source code for > programs for it? I use to have an HP48gx that had the eq-lib as well > as equation solver and would like to acquire them again. I don't have > my own computer, so I'm not able to download any programs from any > site. There doesn't seem to be much useful information on the web > regarding HP49gx any more. > Try looking at http://www.hpcalc.org/ In addition to massive numbers of programs and libraries and, sometime,s source codes, it often has connections to the authors, from whom you can sometimes get the source codes when they can't be found at http://www.hpcalc.org/ ==== Do not despair. Have you not heard of www.hpcal.org ? As far as source code all the User RPL code for the HP48 is directly transferable to the HP49 with minimal or no change at all! You should obtain access to a PC, however, to gain access to the web and be able to download code to the portable machine unless you use someone else's HP48/49 with serial connection. ==== Do not despair. Have you not heard of www.hpcal.org ? NO, but if add a 'c' in a proper place, it will be ok: www.hpcalc.org > As far as source code all the User RPL code for the HP48 is > directly transferable to the HP49 with minimal or no > change at all! You should obtain access to a PC, however, to > gain access to the web and be able to download code to > the portable machine unless you use someone else's HP48/49 > with serial connection. ==== AHA! Do not despair. Have you not heard of www.hpcal.org ? > NO, > but if add a 'c' in a proper place, it will be ok: > www.hpcalc.org ==== I wonder whether a new HP-49G is still worth buying if I see al the quality issues (e.g. Capacitor failure, bad screen, ...). I read in this newsgroup that the warranty is of no use. I also know that the keyboard is not as good as the keyboard of the HP-48. Could you please give me some advice? Belgium ==== I used to have two 48GX and one 49G plus one TI 89 No I have one 48GX plus one 75C and one 49G plus another 49G Neither of the 49G are the new Chinese models, but the keys are OK NEVER try to compare the keys to other brand of calculator! The HP 48GX keys are much better, but there is no FlashRAM in the 48 That alone makes the 49G my primary calculator on the road. At home on numeric computing on the stack I use the 48GX The old 41CX serves as the back-up alarm clock. I would still get a 49G as the only calculator if that was the question. Maybe 48G+/GX is better for you?! The warranty works beautifully in Finland. Some capacitor failures (due to the supplier of those beauties) where immediately replaced. Where do you live? I wonder whether a new HP-49G is still worth buying if I see al the quality > issues (e.g. Capacitor failure, bad screen, ...). I read in this newsgroup that the warranty is of no use. I also know that > the keyboard is not as good as the keyboard of the HP-48. Could you please give me some advice? Belgium > ==== If you can find a 48GX, I'd go with that... Rod I wonder whether a new HP-49G is still worth buying if I see al the quality > issues (e.g. Capacitor failure, bad screen, ...). I read in this newsgroup that the warranty is of no use. I also know that > the keyboard is not as good as the keyboard of the HP-48. Could you please give me some advice? Belgium > ==== I guess you have used an RPL machine before, right? There is no doubt that you will find many fans in this newsgroup of the HP49 (I myself being a die-hard freak). However, since you had to ask, this is such a special machine that deserves your personal evaluation before you buy it! Find one and test it for as long as you can... assuming of course that you have been and RPL user for some time now. Do not make such a decision on what others might say about it. ==== I am a little allerted because the command LIBS gives on my calc the following List on the stack { 257 2 257 2 2... It looks like lib257 is double-attached? lib257 is not visibible in the Filer, so what could be wrong, and is there someting to fix and how? ..Heiko ==== > LIBS > gives on my calc the following List on the stack > { 257 2 257 2 2... It looks like lib257 is double-attached? That's very weird. First of all, the 257 library is the MASD library, so when attached you should after calling LIBS: { MASD V5 257 } Try removing all the external libraries and see what it displays, then re-install each library one at a time to see which is the faulty one (probably not attaching the library correctly) ==== > It looks like lib257 is double-attached? That's very weird. First of all, the 257 library is the MASD library, so > when attached you should after calling LIBS: > { MASD V5 257 } I have found the initiator: Informbuilder v1.6 which is I think obsolete, because v1.7 is abailable. I will make my experience with the new version of it and will report on that. But nevertheless I got still { 257} when calling the LIBS-command not MASD V5! And lib 257 is invisible with the filer ?! I would like to mention, that I have had no really problem with the mis-attached lib, I have just wondered about the double-attachment. Sorry for my nosy questions. Best wishes Heiko ==== lib 257 does not have a name, so it's normal to get an empty name. However, what is not normal, is that you should not get a name at all! as it is a built in lib. you can not see this lib with the filer because it's in ROM, and it is not a real lib in the user lib sense of the term. It looks like lib257 is double-attached? That's very weird. First of all, the 257 library is the MASD library, > so > when attached you should after calling LIBS: > { MASD V5 257 } I have found the initiator: Informbuilder v1.6 which is I think > obsolete, > because v1.7 is abailable. I will make my experience with > the new version of it and will report on that. But nevertheless I got still { 257} when calling the > LIBS-command not MASD V5! > And lib 257 is invisible with the filer ?! I would like to mention, that I have had no really problem > with the mis-attached lib, I have just wondered about the > double-attachment. Sorry for my nosy questions. Best wishes > Heiko ==== > Informbuilder v1.6 which is I think > obsolete, > because v1.7 is abailable. I will make my experience with > the new version of it and will report on that. I have reproduced the double attachment with Informbuilder v1.6. With Informbuilder v.1.7 it is ok. ..Heiko ==== lib 257 does not have a name, so it's normal to get an empty name. > However, what is not normal, is that you should not get a name at all! as it > is a built in lib. > you can not see this lib with the filer because it's in ROM, and it is not a > real lib in the user lib sense of the term. > Of course it will appear! all libraries with an ID > 256 will appear in the LIBS menu. The the 257 library doesn't have an empty name but MASD V5 Cyrille, I'm very disappointed! ==== > you can not see this lib with the filer because it's in ROM, and it is not a > real lib in the user lib sense of the term. Of course it will appear! all libraries with an ID > 256 will appear in the > LIBS menu. > The the 257 library doesn't have an empty name but MASD V5 With ROM 1.19-6 on my HP49G lib 257 appears in a list, with an empty string after calling LIBS. It does *not appear in the *filer. Hope this clearifies. best wishes Heiko ==== > Of course it will appear! all libraries with an ID > 256 will appear in the > LIBS menu. > The the 257 library doesn't have an empty name but MASD V5 Cyrille, I'm very disappointed! Well, actually, if you look at the source for the LIBS command, you will see (line 862, CCVR/covports.s): *_PrepLib A=0.A A=DAT0.X LC 100 ?A<=C.X -> .q1 % If rom lib, do nothing LC 7FF ?A=C.X -> .q1 % If not a lib, do nothing LC(3)788 ?A=C.X -> .q1 % AntiBugBonux for erable LC 700 ?A=C.X -> .q1 % command library so, any libs of rom id <=256, and different from 788 (Erable) and 700 (command library) will not be displayed. I wonder why the second erable library and MASD libs have never been added there... This is a bug... Cyrille ==== lib 257 does not have a name, so it's normal to get an empty name. > However, what is not normal, is that you should not get a name at all! as it > is a built in lib. > you can not see this lib with the filer because it's in ROM, and it is not a > real lib in the user lib sense of the term. Of course it will appear! all libraries with an ID > 256 will appear in the > LIBS menu. > The the 257 library doesn't have an empty name but MASD V5 Cyrille, I'm very disappointed! This one seems to depend on the ROM revision. With 1.18, it's displayed as {MASD V5 257 2}, but with 1.19-6, it's displayed as { 257 2 }. The filer doesn't show library 257 with either ROM revision, presumably because it's not in the user portion of flash. -- ==== > This one seems to depend on the ROM revision. With 1.18, it's displayed > as {MASD V5 257 2}, but with 1.19-6, it's displayed as { 257 2 }. You're right, I was using 1.14 ! go wonder ... > The filer doesn't show library 257 with either ROM revision, presumably > because it's not in the user portion of flash. Exactly ==== -- ==== I wonder if you can help me. I was a happy owner of a Hp 49g till it die. It doesn.82t tur on or off. It doesn.82t cancel, ando sometimes it reboots alone. I am from argentina. I am trying to get Hp Argentina to replace my calculator for new one (or repair mine) but, with out paying a cent. The want me to pay u$s 130 for a rechange, they keep my calculator and they give me a new one. It is a lot of money for me. I can.82t afford it. Did Hp of america accept the fabrication errror? Did they change th calculators for new ones. I wonder i f you can help me sending me all the information you have about the problems of the hp 49g wich were made in china. I know of the capacitor, but i don.82t know if it is that. Please help me. Esteban Suarez Marenzi Argentina, Buenos Aires ==== Mybe what your problem is the common problem what affect the HPs.49G made in China (serial CN1..........). The better capacitor is of ... 470 microfarads and 6,3 v.d.c. See the next page ... http://www.geocities.com/deachp/duda8.html Miguel Angel CAPORALINI HERK (M.A.C.H.) **************************************************************************** **** > Arrhmmm! > I surely could also be dead batteries, faulty library causing reboot, etc... Give us all the contact information and we will surely ask HP > why the HP Argentina is acting like this. > I HAVE NEVER BEEN TOLD BY HP TO BUY > A FAULTY CALCULATOR AGAIN. > There must be a some sort of mistake. > Ofcourse you should have a replacement unit for free!!! > I wonder if you can help me. I was a happy owner of a Hp 49g till it > die. It doesn.82t tur on or off. It doesn.82t cancel, ando sometimes it > reboots alone. > I am from argentina. I am trying to get Hp Argentina to replace my > calculator for new one (or repair mine) but, with out paying a cent. > The want me to pay u$s 130 for a rechange, they keep my calculator and > they give me a new one. > It is a lot of money for me. I can.82t afford it. > Did Hp of america accept the fabrication errror? Did they change th > calculators for new ones. > I wonder i f you can help me sending me all the information you have > about the problems of the hp 49g wich were made in china. I know of > the capacitor, but i don.82t know if it is that. > Please help me. Esteban Suarez Marenzi > Argentina, Buenos Aires ==== What I really need is to find someone who had his calculator repair or fix, or change for a new one, because of the problem with the capacitor. In HP Argentina they told they have no record in the world of a calculator with this problem. I can.82t believe them. I have found hundreds of messages in forums of people with the same problem, and up to a guy who knows how to fix it. The situation in Argentina is not easy. Our salarys are the lowest in history. I don.82t have the money they ask me to have my calculator replaced. It is a fortune : u$s 130.- I earn u$s 200.- a month. I work and I study industrial Engineering. I bought my HP 49G with a lot of effort. So please, write to HP Argentina. Let them hear what we have to say. www.hp.com an choose argentina. servicehpa@hp.com esteban suarez marenzi argentina, buenos aires > Give us all the contact information and we will surely ask HP > why the HP Argentina is acting like this. > I HAVE NEVER BEEN TOLD BY HP TO BUY > A FAULTY CALCULATOR AGAIN. > There must be a some sort of mistake. > Ofcourse you should have a replacement unit for free!!! > I wonder if you can help me. I was a happy owner of a Hp 49g till it > die. It doesn.82t tur on or off. It doesn.82t cancel, ando sometimes it > reboots alone. > I am from argentina. I am trying to get Hp Argentina to replace my > calculator for new one (or repair mine) but, with out paying a cent. > The want me to pay u$s 130 for a rechange, they keep my calculator and > they give me a new one. > It is a lot of money for me. I can.82t afford it. > Did Hp of america accept the fabrication errror? Did they change th > calculators for new ones. > I wonder i f you can help me sending me all the information you have > about the problems of the hp 49g wich were made in china. I know of > the capacitor, but i don.82t know if it is that. > Please help me. Esteban Suarez Marenzi > Argentina, Buenos Aires ==== > What I really need is to find someone who had his calculator repair or > fix, or change for a new one, because of the problem with the > capacitor. > In HP Argentina they told they have no record in the world of a > calculator with this problem. I can.82t believe them. I have found > hundreds of messages in forums of people with the same problem, and up > to a guy who knows how to fix it. Ask to speak to a manager. HP has recognized the capacitor issue and will exchange your calculator for free. Just need to speak to the right person ==== .8d Hola ! Esteban: Mira, yo tambi.8en vivo en Argentina y hablo castellano. è Qu.8e te parece s me escribes a mi direcci.97n necesitas ?. A decir verdad, no te entiendo lo que quieres decir en el Foro en Ingl.8es. Cordiales saludos desde Neuqu.8en - Patagonia.[:.8c) Miguel Angel CAPORALINI HERK (M.A.C.H.) **************************************************************************** *** > What I really need is to find someone who had his calculator repair or > fix, or change for a new one, because of the problem with the > capacitor. > In HP Argentina they told they have no record in the world of a > calculator with this problem. I can.82t believe them. I have found > hundreds of messages in forums of people with the same problem, and up > to a guy who knows how to fix it. > The situation in Argentina is not easy. Our salarys are the lowest in > history. > I don.82t have the money they ask me to have my calculator replaced. It > is a fortune : u$s 130.- > I earn u$s 200.- a month. I work and I study industrial Engineering. I > bought my HP 49G with a lot of effort. > So please, write to HP Argentina. Let them hear what we have to say. > www.hp.com an choose argentina. > servicehpa@hp.com esteban suarez marenzi > argentina, buenos aires > Give us all the contact information and we will surely ask HP > why the HP Argentina is acting like this. > I HAVE NEVER BEEN TOLD BY HP TO BUY > A FAULTY CALCULATOR AGAIN. > There must be a some sort of mistake. > Ofcourse you should have a replacement unit for free!!! > I wonder if you can help me. I was a happy owner of a Hp 49g till it > die. It doesn.82t tur on or off. It doesn.82t cancel, ando sometimes it > reboots alone. > I am from argentina. I am trying to get Hp Argentina to replace my > calculator for new one (or repair mine) but, with out paying a cent. > The want me to pay u$s 130 for a rechange, they keep my calculator and > they give me a new one. > It is a lot of money for me. I can.82t afford it. > Did Hp of america accept the fabrication errror? Did they change th > calculators for new ones. > I wonder i f you can help me sending me all the information you have > about the problems of the hp 49g wich were made in china. I know of > the capacitor, but i don.82t know if it is that. > Please help me. Esteban Suarez Marenzi > Argentina, Buenos Aires ==== > What I really need is to find someone who had his calculator repair or > fix, or change for a new one, because of the problem with the > capacitor. > In HP Argentina they told they have no record in the world of a > calculator with this problem. I can.82t believe them. I have found > hundreds of messages in forums of people with the same problem, and up > to a guy who knows how to fix it. Ask to speak to a manager. HP has recognized the capacitor issue and will > exchange your calculator for free. > Just need to speak to the right person > I have written a compalin to HP of USA. They answer saying: We do not have any records of the problem you are describing. Sometimes a calculator locks up or will not respond correctly. The calculator might require a reset for a variety of reasons. Performing a soft reset will not affect the memory on the calculator. However, all other types of resetting will erase the memory and restore the calculator's defaults. For this reason, it is important that you make a back up any critical data before resetting, if possible. All the same I have been listening thousands of times. the capacitor issue??? PLease I need your help desesperadtly. Esteban Suarez MArenzi Argentina, Buneos Aires ==== Please tell me what is te seria number of your calc. I have a lot of S/N. (CN...) of many calc with the capacitor's problem if I know what is your S/N maybe that I can help you. JoGa > I have written a compalin to HP of USA. They answer saying: > We do not have any records of the problem you are describing. > Sometimes > a calculator locks up or will not respond correctly. The calculator > might require a reset for a variety of reasons. Performing a soft > reset > will not affect the memory on the calculator. However, all other types > of resetting will erase the memory and restore the calculator's > defaults. For this reason, it is important that you make a back up any > critical data before resetting, if possible. All the same I have been listening thousands of times. > the capacitor issue??? PLease I need your help desesperadtly. > Esteban Suarez MArenzi > Argentina, Buneos Aires ==== > All the same I have been listening thousands of times. > the capacitor issue??? PLease I need your help desesperadtly. If your calculator just resets from time to time then they are right : this is not a capacitor issue. You probably installed some buggy external software that are corrupting the memory and make it crashes often If your problem was a capacitor problem then you wouldn't be able to turn your calculator on after you had changed the batteries. So based on your description, I'm afraid that HP in this case is right and there's nothing wrong with your calculator. If your calculator is under warranty and doesn't turn on just send it back with the following text: Problem description: -Calculator under warranty, calculator refuses to start after I changed the batteries. ==== Do you have installed a program in the flash of the hp49g because it can cause the calculators to reboot all the time ( you can't do anything it just reboot after 3 sec ) the problem can be solved by pressing the drop key when it reboot and delete the faulty program ( i had already this problem because i had installed hp48 program on the 49 ) I hope that i have been helpful Fran.8dois MULLER > I wonder if you can help me. I was a happy owner of a Hp 49g till it > die. It doesn.82t tur on or off. It doesn.82t cancel, ando sometimes it > reboots alone. > I am from argentina. I am trying to get Hp Argentina to replace my > calculator for new one (or repair mine) but, with out paying a cent. > The want me to pay u$s 130 for a rechange, they keep my calculator and > they give me a new one. > It is a lot of money for me. I can.82t afford it. > Did Hp of america accept the fabrication errror? Did they change th > calculators for new ones. > I wonder i f you can help me sending me all the information you have > about the problems of the hp 49g wich were made in china. I know of > the capacitor, but i don.82t know if it is that. > Please help me. Esteban Suarez Marenzi > Argentina, Buenos Aires ==== Arrhmmm! I surely could also be dead batteries, faulty library causing reboot, etc... > Give us all the contact information and we will surely ask HP > why the HP Argentina is acting like this. > I HAVE NEVER BEEN TOLD BY HP TO BUY > A FAULTY CALCULATOR AGAIN. > There must be a some sort of mistake. > Ofcourse you should have a replacement unit for free!!! > I wonder if you can help me. I was a happy owner of a Hp 49g till it > die. It doesn.82t tur on or off. It doesn.82t cancel, ando sometimes it > reboots alone. > I am from argentina. I am trying to get Hp Argentina to replace my > calculator for new one (or repair mine) but, with out paying a cent. > The want me to pay u$s 130 for a rechange, they keep my calculator and > they give me a new one. > It is a lot of money for me. I can.82t afford it. > Did Hp of america accept the fabrication errror? Did they change th > calculators for new ones. > I wonder i f you can help me sending me all the information you have > about the problems of the hp 49g wich were made in china. I know of > the capacitor, but i don.82t know if it is that. > Please help me. Esteban Suarez Marenzi > Argentina, Buenos Aires ==== Give us all the contact information and we will surely ask HP why the HP Argentina is acting like this. I HAVE NEVER BEEN TOLD BY HP TO BUY A FAULTY CALCULATOR AGAIN. There must be a some sort of mistake. Ofcourse you should have a replacement unit for free!!! > I wonder if you can help me. I was a happy owner of a Hp 49g till it > die. It doesn.82t tur on or off. It doesn.82t cancel, ando sometimes it > reboots alone. > I am from argentina. I am trying to get Hp Argentina to replace my > calculator for new one (or repair mine) but, with out paying a cent. > The want me to pay u$s 130 for a rechange, they keep my calculator and > they give me a new one. > It is a lot of money for me. I can.82t afford it. > Did Hp of america accept the fabrication errror? Did they change th > calculators for new ones. > I wonder i f you can help me sending me all the information you have > about the problems of the hp 49g wich were made in china. I know of > the capacitor, but i don.82t know if it is that. > Please help me. Esteban Suarez Marenzi > Argentina, Buenos Aires ==== > What I really need is to find someone who had his calculator repair or > fix, or change for a new one, because of the problem with the > capacitor. > In HP Argentina they told they have no record in the world of a > calculator with this problem. I can't believe them. I have found > hundreds of messages in forums of people with the same problem, and up > to a guy who knows how to fix it. Ask to speak to a manager. HP has recognized the capacitor issue and will > exchange your calculator for free. > Just need to speak to the right person > I have written a compalin to HP of USA. They answer saying: > We do not have any records of the problem you are describing. > Sometimes > a calculator locks up or will not respond correctly. The calculator > might require a reset for a variety of reasons. Performing a soft > reset > will not affect the memory on the calculator. However, all other types > of resetting will erase the memory and restore the calculator's > defaults. For this reason, it is important that you make a back up any > critical data before resetting, if possible. All the same I have been listening thousands of times. > the capacitor issue??? PLease I need your help desesperadtly. It sure sounds like the defective capacitor problem to me. It's hard to believe that HP support doesn't have any record of this problem. For your situation I recommend the following (admittedly drastic) procedure. First off, installing fresh batteries can't hurt. To make sure that it isn't an installed library causing the problem, hold down the backspace key while warmstarting to keep any libraries from being attached. If you do an [ON]&[F3] warmstart, pressing the backspace key in time might be tricky, so instead, get to the Tests display by pressing [ON]&[F4] together. Now hold down backspace and press [Q] (Reboot) to do a warmstart, and release the backspace key after it's back to a normal display. You'll get a DROP Error: Too Few Arguments from having the backspace key still down when it starts, but that's no big deal. If it works ok now, then you have a bad library and it's just a matter of attaching them one at a time until you find it. If it's an intermittent problem, it may well be difficult to tell whether you still have a problem or not. In that case, you may want to make sure that all libraries are available on your PC, and then use the filer to PURGE them all from the calculator. To make it easier to find all of the libraries on the PC, you may want to use the filer to SEND them all to a common directory on the PC before purging them. If you still have a problem, then ARCHIVE your home directory to your PC, and also make sure that you have copies of anything from your ports available on the PC. You may want to use the filer to SEND copies of anything from the ports to a common directory on your PC. Then do a memory clear. Use the filer to PURGE anything still remaining in the ports. Make sure that you have fresh batteries in the calculator. Then start the flash upgrade procedure (use revision 1.18, because HP may well refuse to support a calculator with a beta ROM installed), but erase bank 0 and banks 8 through 15 (actually, it wouldn't hurt to erase all banks) before doing the Download System. Finally, do another memory clear to remove any 'CASDIR' or CAS variables that were re-installed after the first memory clear (some of the CAS variables will be re-installed this time too). This will ensure that you have a really clean 49G, with nothing but the operating system installed. Of course, once you have a working calculator, upgrade it to 1.19-6, download and install everything that you want in your ports, and download and RESTORE your archived home directory. If you still have a problem, contact HP support again, and if they still suggest resetting the calculator, explain that you've already tried that and it still doesn't work and you're extremely unhappy. Of course, this assumes that you haven't damaged your 49G by spilling something on it or anything else that would void any warranty. I can understand HP not wanting to give you a free replacement in that case. -- ==== I am trying to port some programs from HP-48GX to HP-48S. They fit. But so far I have found that 'INFORM' isn't found, maybe something has to be attached? Is there a set of download-able functions for HP-48S to help it have bette HP-48GX compatablility? ==== Kevin Waite :: > I am trying to port some programs from HP-48GX to HP-48S. They fit. But so far I have found that 'INFORM' isn't found, maybe something > has to be attached? Is there a set of download-able functions for HP-48S to help > it have bette HP-48GX compatablility? will it work on SX :( Robert Tiismus ==== Robert Tiismus schrieb im Newsbeitrag > Kevin Waite :: > I am trying to port some programs from HP-48GX to HP-48S. They fit. But so far I have found that 'INFORM' isn't found, maybe something > has to be attached? Is there a set of download-able functions for HP-48S to help > it have bette HP-48GX compatablility? will it work on SX :( > Inform2 won't make sense on an SX, since it 'only' an enhanced user parameter functionality for the GXbuilt-in input form engine. My tip: Avoid using input forms when SX compatibility is important. However, you could use choose boxes on the SX and GX, there exist many choose box engines for the SX on www.hpcalc.org . The one or other may even be parameter-compatible with the GX built-in CHOOSE... Hmmm, or you could use the SpeedMaster package, which is a full speed input form engine, with some samples. It should run on both the SX and GX. Raymond ==== hp49g 1.19-6 try this: 'INTVX(COS(X)^5xSIN(X))' EVAL TRIGC i don't get the right answer do you? the right answer is: '-(COS(X)^6)/6' the answer given is: '-((COS(X)^6-1)/6)' also i got on flag 116: prefer cos() but and i still got the result on sin(). ==== > hp49g > 1.19-6 > try this: 'INTVX(COS(X)^5xSIN(X))' > EVAL > TRIGC i don't get the right answer > do you? the right answer is: '-(COS(X)^6)/6' the answer given is: '-((COS(X)^6-1)/6)' also i got on flag 116: prefer cos() but and i still got the result on sin(). > Oh come on - remember about the constant of integration????? Martin Cohen ==== <639cb51.0305021125.66dd0907@posting.google.com>, > hp49g > 1.19-6 > try this: 'INTVX(COS(X)^5xSIN(X))' > EVAL > TRIGC i don't get the right answer > do you? the right answer is: '-(COS(X)^6)/6' the answer given is: '-((COS(X)^6-1)/6)' Both answers are correct or both wrong because their difference is a constant! ==== > i don't get the right answer > do you? the right answer is: '-(COS(X)^6)/6' the answer given is: '-((COS(X)^6-1)/6)' Come on ! do we have to argue again about what's right or wrong result? The only difference here is a constant term. So the answer is perfectly correct. ==== it also happens with: INVTX(COS(7X)^5xSIN(7X)) and in all other similar expressions. the constant is not taken away like in the other integrals (like invtx(sin(x)) ==== now try this one and try to dig out the *constant* :) INVTX(SIN(7X)^5xCOS(7X)) good luck! ==== oops i got it: sin(7x)^5 and cos(*x*) [not 7X] OK time for me for a nap (JHM) ;) sorry for the lost bytes but it was fun, wan't it. peep ==== <639cb51.0305021219.77929f64@posting.google.com>, > now try this one and try to dig out the *constant* :) INVTX(SIN(7X)^5xCOS(7X)) good luck! Which constant? There are infinitely many possible CORRECT constants! If you want some *particular* constant, you must require some additional condition, such as having the antiderivative equal to zero at X=0. This condition, 0 at X=0, is probably the most common condition to used to pick a particular antiderivative in ral. Note that the simplest antiderivative wrt X for 'COS(X)^5*SIN(X)' which is 0 at X=0 is the one given by the HP49G! ==== > now try this one and try to dig out the *constant* :) INVTX(SIN(7X)^5xCOS(7X)) I get a nicely formatted answer: 1 6 -*SIN(7*X) 6 ----------- 7 Which is more useful than what is returned by Derive: cos(42*x) cos(28*x) 5*cos(14*x) - --------- + --------- - ----------- 1344 224 448 -- ----- jr> J'ai fait. Ne bougez pas, l'aide soignante va venir nettoyer. -+- FF in GNU - Le vieil homme et la merde -+- ==== now try this one and try to dig out the *constant* :) INVTX(SIN(7X)^5xCOS(7X)) I get a nicely formatted answer: 1 6 > -*SIN(7*X) > 6 > ----------- > 7 Which is more useful than what is returned by Derive: cos(42*x) cos(28*x) 5*cos(14*x) > - --------- + --------- - ----------- > 1344 224 448 The TI-68k return an even nicer answer :-) sin(7x)^6/42 -- Bhuvanesh ==== <662e00ed.0305031655.170d7cb@posting.google.com>, > now try this one and try to dig out the *constant* :) INVTX(SIN(7X)^5xCOS(7X)) I get a nicely formatted answer: 1 6 > -*SIN(7*X) > 6 > ----------- > 7 Which is more useful than what is returned by Derive: cos(42*x) cos(28*x) 5*cos(14*x) > - --------- + --------- - ----------- > 1344 224 448 The TI-68k return an even nicer answer :-) sin(7x)^6/42 TI's tend to give book answers. HP's tend to give useful answers. The HP can give the TI answer by using EVAL, but the TI can't give the HP answer at all. ==== Pine.LNX.4.33.0305032202450.23214-100000@patchwork.seclogd.org, Erwann > -- > ----- > jr> J'ai fait. > Ne bougez pas, l'aide soignante va venir nettoyer. > -+- FF in GNU - Le vieil homme et la merde -+- > I've always wondered.. Where do you get your .sig content ? ==== [QUOTE]> The HP can give the TI answer by using EVAL, but the TI > can't give the HP answer at all.[/QUOTE] in my calculator: 'INTVX(SIN(7X)^5*COS(X)' it should have been 'INTVX(SIN(7X)^5*COS(7X))' (which gives a nice answer) that's why i though i was getting the wrong answer (because i enter the wrong expression). i got confused because when i first tried this in the HP49G: INTVX(COS(X)^5*SIN(X)) i got as an answer: '1/6*SIN(X)^6-2x(1/4)xSIN(X)^4+1/2xSIN(X)^2' EVAL '(SIN(X)^6-3xSIN(X)^4+3xSIN(x)^2)/6' as you can see, it is hard to tell if there is a *constant* buried in the expression. sometimes the HP49G gives out results with constants, sometimes it doesn't. so if i cannot determine if there is a constant buried in the expression, i could do a mistake somewhere. i knew before hand the answer to the problem and that is why i did a TRIGC (it doesn't simplify otherwise). again, when i entered the mistakenly entered expression ( 'INTVX(SIN(7X)^5*COS(X)' ) i got a little more confuse because i though i was entering the correct expression ( 'INTVX(SIN(7X)^5*COS(7X)' ) and i was getting something i could not simplify. > <662e00ed.0305031655.170d7cb@posting.google.com>, now try this one and try to dig out the *constant* :) INVTX(SIN(7X)^5xCOS(7X)) I get a nicely formatted answer: 1 6 > -*SIN(7*X) > 6 > ----------- > 7 Which is more useful than what is returned by Derive: cos(42*x) cos(28*x) 5*cos(14*x) > - --------- + --------- - ----------- > 1344 224 448 The TI-68k return an even nicer answer :-) sin(7x)^6/42 TI's tend to give book answers. HP's tend to give useful answers. The HP can give the TI answer by using EVAL, but the TI > can't give the HP answer at all. ==== <639cb51.0305032141.7023eb2f@posting.google.com>, > [QUOTE]> The HP can give the TI answer by using EVAL, but the TI > can't give the HP answer at all.[/QUOTE] > in my calculator: 'INTVX(SIN(7X)^5*COS(X)' it should have been 'INTVX(SIN(7X)^5*COS(7X))' (which gives a nice answer) ==== Is a slide rule worth a 41CX? > Mine is a Pickett & Eckel Deci Log Log with a brown leather belt case. The principal use for it was in my last job before retiring. Sometimes when the biology-types were getting to uppity, some of us engineers would stride in with our slide rules strapped - there is a way of walking to make them be noticed. <8e457voues4a7og84fe7lutf9tg36c8meq@4ax.com> <3E754025.7985903E@ij.net> ==== >Mine is a Pickett & Eckel Deci Log Log with a brown leather belt case. >The principal use for it was in my last job before retiring. Sometimes >when the biology-types were getting to uppity, some of us engineers >would stride in with our slide rules strapped - there is a way of >walking to make them be noticed. Did you have to wear spurs as well? ;-) -- ==== >Mine is a Pickett & Eckel Deci Log Log with a brown leather belt case. >The principal use for it was in my last job before retiring. Sometimes >when the biology-types were getting to uppity, some of us engineers >would stride in with our slide rules strapped - there is a way of >walking to make them be noticed. Did you have to wear spurs as well? ;-) Being from Minnesota, spurs wouldn't be too helpful - especially between October and March - but snowshoes and hip waders could be. Both are a tad hard to walk indoors on and whats more the waders would cover up the slide rule - the whole effect would be lost. ==== >Mine is a Pickett & Eckel Deci Log Log with a brown leather belt case. >The principal use for it was in my last job before retiring. Sometimes >when the biology-types were getting to uppity, some of us engineers >would stride in with our slide rules strapped - there is a way of >walking to make them be noticed. Did you have to wear spurs as well? ;-) About 29 years ago I owned and used a 10-inch Hemmi 259D Bamboo Sliderule however I was not able to use it in school since the electronic handheld calculator became available and beat the sliderule hands down. And until 15 years later it was stolen from my baggage overseas. That sliderule was for mechanical engineers and handled every mechanical engineering job, it even had a Log Trig Scale. It was the best sliderule, as far as I was concerned, a bamboo material that was bound by a plastic or enamel material on the outside and where the scales were found. The cursor assembly was of a very good design, Hemmi placing a good and thoughtful design on it. The cursor glass was made of real glass. Everything on the sliderule was the Real McCoy, no frills. About 7 years ago I was able to purchase a brand-new Hemmi 259D from a friendly Hemmi Associate in Japan. He sold me the authentic sliderule, the owner's manual, and the brown leather case - all new. So right now I have recovered something of worth that I lost long ago. But for a sliderule to compete with an electronic calculator is a mismatch. However if you have plenty of time in your work it is still a good thing to be using a sliderule. Roberto120 ==== I noticed that HP no longer has the HP49G on its web site. The HP48GX is there, and several non-professional calculators. Looks like Carly is not interested in pro products. GR ==== > I noticed that HP no longer has the HP49G on its web site. The HP48GX is there, and several non-professional calculators. Looks like Carly is not interested in pro products. GR I noticed the same thing yesterday when I was trying to look up the specs of the HP-49 compared to the HP-40. In order to find the 49, I had to go to google and search for it. I couldn't even get there from HP's search engine. Once I got there, I was able to find the path (support I think). Wierd that the search engine at HP's website doesn't even recognize the HP-49g. It said no matching documents. --CS ==== > I noticed that HP no longer has the HP49G on its web site. The HP48GX is there, and several non-professional calculators. Looks like Carly is not interested in pro products. GR I noticed the same thing yesterday when I was trying to look up the > specs of the HP-49 compared to the HP-40. In order to find the 49, I > had to go to google and search for it. I couldn't even get there from > HP's search engine. Once I got there, I was able to find the path > (support I think). Wierd that the search engine at HP's website doesn't even recognize > the HP-49g. It said no matching documents. www.hp.com I think I have proved my case: there is no longer a dash between the HP and the model number!!! ==== As the subject says... since I have been to this group... I remember reading it using Unix as a matter of fact... the old 286 day's... Anyway where can I gat a copy of the FAQ and download sites? JB Originator: mschaef@io.com (MSCHAEF.COM) ==== >As the subject says... since I have been to this group... >I remember reading it using Unix as a matter of fact... the old 286 day's... >Anyway where can I gat a copy of the FAQ and download sites? These three sites should be a pretty good start, particularly the first if you're still an active user. http://www.hpcalc.org/ http://www.hpmuseum.org/ http://www.hp41.org/ -- http://www.mschaef.com ==== > >As the subject says... since I have been to this group... >I remember reading it using Unix as a matter of fact... the old 286 day's... >Anyway where can I gat a copy of the FAQ and download sites? > These three sites should be a pretty good start, particularly the first > if you're still an active user. http://www.hpcalc.org/ > http://www.hpmuseum.org/ > http://www.hp41.org/ Also, the FAQ is here: http://www.engr.uvic.ca/~aschoorl/faq/ -- darren ==== I'd feel a lot more confident about the future of RPN calculators at HP if their current ad campaign had taglines like ENTER hp + instead of + hp = -- For I know things that you don't know / And I see things you'll never see / And I've a different way of living, you know / And I've such a different frame of mind, and so ... / I'm on my way to the funnyfarm -- Happy Rhodes, To the Funnyfarm ==== The point of ad campaigns is to sell stuff, not confuse the hell out of people. > I'd feel a lot more confident about the future of RPN calculators at HP > if their current ad campaign had taglines like ENTER hp + instead of + hp = ==== > The point of ad campaigns is to sell stuff, not confuse the hell out of > people. ...a theory that does not seem to be borne out in modern advertising, however.* Yo, Steve -- good one! -- John Miller NOSPAM@n4vu.com *Note to the humor-impaired: I was making a joke. ==== I have written a compalin to HP of USA. They answer saying: We do not have any records of the problem you are describing (capacitor). Sometimes a calculator locks up or will not respond correctly. The calculator might require a reset for a variety of reasons. Performing a soft reset will not affect the memory on the calculator. However, all other types of resetting will erase the memory and restore the calculator's defaults. For this reason, it is important that you make a back up any critical data before resetting, if possible. All the same I have been listening thousands of times. the capacitor issue??? PLease I need your help desesperadtly. Esteban Suarez MArenzi Argentina, Buneos Aires ==== Que tal Esteban, yo no soy Avenard pero creo que tuve el mismo a la calculadora y te cuento que hice yo. the same problem (i think) with TWO calcs ! Both death now ! Luciano Pd. A new capacitor does not fix my problem ! ==== I would guess yes. But would like to know for sure before trying to upgrade. ----- Original Message ----- ==== Kevin Waite schrieb im Newsbeitrag I would guess yes. But would like to know for sure > before trying to upgrade. > The revision 'R' is VERY stable. There are nearly no software bugs, and those very few are very well documented. What do you want to upgrade? If you want to add more RAM, the only thing to know is that you should add less than 4MB. However, 1 or 2MB should be sufficient in most cases (IMHO;-) Raymond ==== > I would guess yes. But would like to know for sure > before trying to upgrade. The revision 'R' is VERY stable. > There are nearly no software bugs, > and those very few are very well documented. I could publish a not at all small list of not-documented bugs of the HP48G (JYA also knows several such bugs), but I have no time to do it. Fortunately, most of these are not noticed by the normal user. I used my free time to perfectionize my Timeman for the HP49. Presently only on my site. It obsolates both, the traditional method of setting date and time on the HP49, AND most calendar, time, and clock calibration tools available on hpcalc.org. The paging calendar is in two formats, depending on your setting of flag -42. One can virtually browse through the month, years, and even centuries and scan any wanted day. The calendar preserves its correct shape. - Wolfgang ftp://ftp.math.fu-berlin.de/pub/usr/raut/HP49/time/Timeman/ ==== Wolfgang Rautenberg schrieb im Newsbeitrag >[..] > The revision 'R' is VERY stable. > There are nearly no software bugs, > and those very few are very well documented. [..] > I could publish a not at all small list > of not-documented bugs of the HP48G > [..] > Fortunately, most of these are not noticed by the normal user. > And this is the point. They don't affect the normal user's work in a negative way;-) Up to 1998, I used a rev. M w/o problems, the only thing I had to be aware of was the well known STO port bug. > I used my free time to perfectionize my Timeman for the HP49. > You're the *man Maybe you should make a version for the HP-48, too, so many more users could use it;-) Raymond ==== You're the *man Maybe you should make a version for the HP-48, too, > so many more users could use it;-) Yes, Wolfgang, pleeeeeeease. ==== > Maybe you should make a [Timeman]version for the HP-48, too, > so many more users could use it;-) Yes, Wolfgang, pleeeeeeease. why don't you port Timeman to the 48 instead of loosing your time in suggestions? Timeman uses only three supported commands not in 48-SysRPL: $>grobCR, AskQuestion and ViewStrobject. No problem for you, Raymond, to reprogram these three useful commands for the HP48, using either 48-SysRPL or ML :-) In this NG is discussed much nonsense, but very rarely some useful project. Such a project would be to make a library which ports the most important additions of ACO to SysRPL back to the HP48. Apart from the mentioned examples the Virtual Stack tools, etc. Clearly, it would be a child's play for JYA to present such a lib to the 48-fan community . But he's probably interested in that his HP49 sells well, not the HP48 :-) - Wolfgang. PS. Interesting to know which of the well-known and less known bugs of the HP48 have been fixed by JYA in the HP49 and which not. ==== > Clearly, it would be a child's play for JYA to present such a lib to the > 48-fan community . But he's probably interested in that his HP49 > sells well, not the HP48 :-) I'm more interested with HP49 projects obviously, but this has nothing to do with money. The HP48 is the past. I've spent enough time on it and I will only focus on the HP49 platform. > PS. Interesting to know which of the well-known and less known bugs of > the HP48 have been fixed by JYA in the HP49 and which not. All the public one has been fixed. ==== >[..] > The HP48 is the past. > ==== >.. The HP48 is the past. please notice that you yourself improved may shortcomings of the 48 (e.g. speedup browsing) in terribly long ML programs. All this is obsolated in the HP49 because all kind of browsing has enormeouly speeded up, sometimes even too fast (in particular moving the cursor in the PICT edit environement which is hard on the border of a bug). In the whole, the 49 clearly proves that the Saturn-technology is not at all obsolate if the software is clever written. On the other hand I agree with JYA that the 48 is indeed the past, with or without MK. The old boring spontaneous garbage collection problem can be managed now by everybody in ROM 19-6 (if he uses the CountDown-STARTOFF from Timeman), and the port memory management in 19-6 ia excellent. You can control this yourself by using my Filer2 with an option showing the situation in each User-flashbank and each of the two ERAM-banks. So, with the right second-part-tools the HP49 is absolutely the best calculator on the market, and it could be still slightly better with ROM 19-7. If some expert (not amateurs like Nick) would rewrite the docus for the HP49, it may even attend a renaissance. - Wolfgang PS. A word to JYA: If I said you favourize the HP49 I had no money in mind at all. It is a question of reputation :-) Nobody made ever money for himself with a calculator project. ==== > All this is > obsolated in the HP49 because all kind of browsing has enormeouly > speeded up, sometimes even too fast (in particular moving the cursor in > the PICT edit environement which is hard on the border of a bug). I consider this a feature; you can slow it down by enabling the coordinate display with [+]! Thomas -- Thomas Rast There is no way to peace. Peace is the way! -- Gandhi ==== > All this is > obsolated in the HP49 because all kind of browsing has enormeouly > speeded up, sometimes even too fast (in particular moving the > cursor in the PICT edit environement which is hard on the border > of a bug). > I consider this a feature; you can slow it down by enabling the > coordinate display with [+]! This doesn't solve the problem. While painting, ie. permanently using DOT+ or DOT-, your device amounts to permanently switching + to slow down the cursor's speed. - Wolfgang PS. I would add a second coordinate viewer for painting, showing the genuine pixel coordinates, i.e., 0,0 in the left upper corner. ==== > This doesn't solve the problem. While painting, ie. permanently using > DOT+ or DOT-, your device amounts to permanently switching + to slow > down the cursor's speed. - Wolfgang PS. I would add a second coordinate viewer for painting, showing the > genuine pixel coordinates, i.e., 0,0 in the left upper corner. For an kind of graphic editing, you should use my GTOOLS libe that comes with EDG, it's a very good graphic editor, and you won't have a problem with the keyboard ==== > This doesn't solve the problem. While painting, ie. permanently > using DOT+ or DOT-, your device amounts to permanently switching > + to slow down the cursor's speed. > PS. I would add a second coordinate viewer for painting, showing > the genuine pixel coordinates, i.e., 0,0 in the left upper > corner. > For an kind of graphic editing, you should use my GTOOLS libe that > comes with EDG apart from that I don't know what EDG is, I hate loading big libs for doing something occasionally only. Very seldom I've to correct a grob as in the case of Timeman which shows among other things a world map with a moving noon meridian. Correction is easy on the 48 but painful on the 49. You contradict yourself in some sense. If you still support the 49 why then should the 49 in some details be worse than the 48? What is the problem slowing down cursor speed in the PICT edit mode a little bit? And what would be the problem to add a graphic modus PAINT in which the (x,y) menu key shows the true pixel coordinates? As you know it is impossible to set PPAR with normal means to display these coordinates. Not only by big things but already in some very small details you could demonstrate the superiority of the 49 over the 48 :-) - Wolfgang ==== > apart from that I don't know what EDG is, I hate loading big libs for > doing something occasionally only. Very seldom I've to correct a grob as > in the case of Timeman which shows among other things a world map with a > moving noon meridian. Correction is easy on the 48 but painful on the > 49. It has been ported from the HP48 to the HP49 and included in the library GTOOLS. It's not very big (around 13kB). I find it useful enough to have it in my HP49 all the time. You contradict yourself in some sense. If you still support the 49 why > then should the 49 in some details be worse than the 48? What is the > problem slowing down cursor speed in the PICT edit mode a little bit? > And what would be the problem to add a graphic modus PAINT in which the > (x,y) menu key shows the true pixel coordinates? As you know it is > impossible to set PPAR with normal means to display these coordinates. I guess I can always review the cursor handling in the original HP graphic editor. It's not my fault if was poorly coded in the first place and doesn't take into account that the OS (and the Interrupt System) is much much faster on the HP49 so the delay in the cursor is not good. Should be based on the clock. I'll look into that. You could also report the problem in bugs.hpcalc.org as all problems related to the HP49 should be Not only by big things but already in some very small details you could > demonstrate the superiority of the 49 over the 48 :-) It is demontrated easily. EDG on the HP49 is about 4 KB smaller than its HP48 counterpart ==== I do not know if this should be ROM level R or not. Please advise. ==== R is the latest ROM... none has been produced since. ==== I'm not sure if this coincides with the rules for the forum so if it does not let me know. If anyone is interested I'm selling my HP to PC serial cable on ebay. http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3022269725&category=20335 ==== Just get an old serial mouse, open it up, and use the cable (DON'T CUT IT OUT). You have to reverse the two inside connections on the 4pin side ( it needs to be the white connector, not the black one), but that's easy. After that, reinforce the small 4pin connector with some heat shrink. Mine works great & was free. The schematics are on www.hpcalc.org ==== I would like to know how to call it from a program. Does a FPTR2 exist to call it? Andr.8es ==== 2712dce9.0304232317.5804afb6@posting.google.com, andresfrr@yahoo.com.mx > I would like to know how to call it from a program. Does a FPTR2 exist to call > it? > Andr.8es Of course there are some... =^RunDoOldMatrix EQU #7+4096*5 CON(5) =RunDoNewMatrix =^RunDoNewMatrix EQU #7+4096*6 CON(5) =DoNewMatrixReal =^DoNewMatrixReal EQU #7+4096*7 CON(5) =DoNewMatrixCplx =^DoNewMatrixCplx EQU #7+4096*8 CON(5) =DoOldMatrixReal =^DoOldMatrixReal EQU #7+4096*9 CON(5) =DoOldMatrixCplx =^DoOldMatrixCplx EQU #7+4096*10 CON(5) =DoNewMatrixRealOrCplx =^DoNewMatrixRealOrCplx EQU #7+4096*11 CON(5) =DEB.MATRIX RunDoOldMatrix will edit any kind of Arry/matrix (it's the one called by you press down-arrown on a matrix) RunDoNewMatrix: Equivalent to pressing right-shift + [O] DoNewMatrixReal: Will start a new matrix of reals. If you enter an ZINT it will be converted to reals DoNewMatrixCplx: Will start editing a new matrix of complexes. If you enter a ZINT or a REAL, it will be converted to a complex DoOldMatrixReal: Will edit an existing matrix of reals DoOldMatrixCplx: Will edit an existing matrix of complex DoNewMatrixRealOrCplx: Will edit either an array of reals of an array of complex. If you're editing a matrix of reals and you enter a complex, all object will be converted into reals. (this has to be verified) The last 4 entries are used by the HP48 InformBox when editing arrays ==== install with it, if any? ie. fonts etc...? TIA ( I have the 128k and a 1 Meg card ==== > install with it, if any? ie. fonts etc...? TIA ( I have the 128k and > a 1 Meg card However there are some few utilities available on the floppy disk image that comes with it. ==== After I loaded Erable (MK version) everything worked great....thanks > install with it, if any? ie. fonts etc...? TIA ( I have the 128k and > a 1 Meg card However there are some few utilities available on the floppy disk image that >comes with it. > ==== If so, how is this done? Or are the GX rom files out on the various sites just for the emulator? ==== I'm no expert but I know the 48GX doesn't have flash ROM, hence isn't upgradable (as the 49G is). You are right to assume the ROM files out there are mostly useful for emulators. Eduardo > If so, how is this done? Or are the GX rom files out on the various sites just > for the emulator? Sincerely, > Kevin Waite > ==== I know this question has been posted here before, but the answers seem to be out of date beacuse i could not find any to be useful to me. So i do apologize if i didn't search hard enough. I'm trying to use outlook to read the postings on this news group, but my internet provider doesn't have a news server, does anybody know of a free news server i can use to access this newsgroup? Marturo ==== Salut a tous les posseseurs de 28, Je viens de recuperer une 28 en super bon etat dans un vide-greniers pour 4 euros. C'est une super machine, la premiere que j'ai eue qui se programme en RPL (avant ma 48SX puis ma 48GX). Du coup ca m'a donne l'envie de faire tourner un emulateur de 28 mais la probleme, il faut une image de la ROM. Comme je suis un peu faineant et que je n'ai ni recepteur infrarouge ni 48, ca serait super si quelqu'un pouvait m'envoyer une copie des ROMs, je pense pas que HP s'en sente lese pour autant ;) A vot' bon coeur m'sieu dames! Serge ==== > Salut a tous les posseseurs de 28, Je viens de recuperer une 28 en super bon etat dans un vide-greniers > pour 4 euros. C'est une super machine, la premiere que j'ai eue qui se bonne affaire ! > programme en RPL (avant ma 48SX puis ma 48GX). Du coup ca m'a donne > l'envie de faire tourner un emulateur de 28 mais la probleme, il faut > une image de la ROM. > Comme je suis un peu faineant et que je n'ai ni recepteur infrarouge > ni 48, ca serait super si quelqu'un pouvait m'envoyer une copie des > ROMs, je pense pas que HP s'en sente lese pour autant ;) > A vot' bon coeur m'sieu dames! Serge* J'ai la rom sur une D7 mais h.8elas le lecteur de D7 qui pourrait la relire est HS Si jamais tu vois un integral PC d'HP (station unix portable) dans une brocante... Paul > ==== > Salut a tous les posseseurs de 28, 28C / 28S ??? > Je viens de recuperer une 28 en super bon etat dans un vide-greniers > pour 4 euros. C'est une super machine, la premiere que j'ai eue qui se > programme en RPL (avant ma 48SX puis ma 48GX). Du coup ca m'a donne > l'envie de faire tourner un emulateur de 28 mais la probleme, il faut > une image de la ROM. > Comme je suis un peu faineant et que je n'ai ni recepteur infrarouge > ni 48, ca serait super si quelqu'un pouvait m'envoyer une copie des > ROMs, je pense pas que HP s'en sente lese pour autant ;) > A vot' bon coeur m'sieu dames! Serge ==== J'avais essay.8e de r.8ecup.8erer la rom en passant par une 48 mais .8da ne marche pas. Va voir sur http://privat.swol.de/ChristophGiesselink/ Je lui avait demand.8e mais il ne voulais pas la donner..sans la vendre... :-( PS : Si tu la r.8ecup.8fre, pense .88 moi. PS2 : idem hp42 Serge Guillaume a .8ecrit dans le message de > Salut a tous les posseseurs de 28, Je viens de recuperer une 28 en super bon etat dans un vide-greniers > pour 4 euros. C'est une super machine, la premiere que j'ai eue qui se > programme en RPL (avant ma 48SX puis ma 48GX). Du coup ca m'a donne > l'envie de faire tourner un emulateur de 28 mais la probleme, il faut > une image de la ROM. > Comme je suis un peu faineant et que je n'ai ni recepteur infrarouge > ni 48, ca serait super si quelqu'un pouvait m'envoyer une copie des > ROMs, je pense pas que HP s'en sente lese pour autant ;) > A vot' bon coeur m'sieu dames! Serge ==== .8da fait du bien un peu de fran.8dais.. :-) Romain Serge Guillaume a .8ecrit dans le message de > Salut a tous les posseseurs de 28, Je viens de recuperer une 28 en super bon etat dans un vide-greniers > pour 4 euros. C'est une super machine, la premiere que j'ai eue qui se > programme en RPL (avant ma 48SX puis ma 48GX). Du coup ca m'a donne > l'envie de faire tourner un emulateur de 28 mais la probleme, il faut > une image de la ROM. > Comme je suis un peu faineant et que je n'ai ni recepteur infrarouge > ni 48, ca serait super si quelqu'un pouvait m'envoyer une copie des > ROMs, je pense pas que HP s'en sente lese pour autant ;) > A vot' bon coeur m'sieu dames! Serge <3eb13a41$0$30109$626a54ce@news.free.fr> ==== > Serge Guillaume a .8ecrit dans le message de > Je viens de recuperer une 28 en super bon etat dans un vide-greniers > pour 4 euros. C'est une super machine, la premiere que j'ai eue qui se That's a very good trade, but is it an HP28C or HP28S? > programme en RPL (avant ma 48SX puis ma 48GX). Du coup ca m'a donne > l'envie de faire tourner un emulateur de 28 mais la probleme, il faut > une image de la ROM. > Comme je suis un peu faineant et que je n'ai ni recepteur infrarouge > ni 48, ca serait super si quelqu'un pouvait m'envoyer une copie des > ROMs, je pense pas que HP s'en sente lese pour autant ;) Even if HP wouldn't be hurt by HP28 ROM exchange, such activity is still > J'avais essay.8e de r.8ecup.8erer la rom en passant par une 48 mais .8da ne marche > pas. Va voir sur http://privat.swol.de/ChristophGiesselink/ Je lui avait > demand.8e mais il ne voulais pas la donner..sans la vendre... Of course, selling ROMs that don't belong to you is really a bad thing to do. > PS : Si tu la r.8ecup.8fre, pense .88 moi. > PS2 : idem hp42 Please check the following page: You'll need to have an HP48, though. -- ----- Et si Windows NT plante c'est que vous .90tes trop d.8ebile que pour le configurer correctement ... ou alors vous avez du matos de merde . -+- BB in : Guide du Neuneu d'Usenet - Attention neuneu violeNT -+- ==== > J'avais essay.8e de r.8ecup.8erer la rom en passant par une 48 mais .8da ne marche > pas. Va voir sur http://privat.swol.de/ChristophGiesselink/ Je lui avait > demand.8e mais il ne voulais pas la donner..sans la vendre... > :-( I doubt Christoph would have asked money for a ROM. If he doesn't want to distribute it it simply because he can't (he needs HP approval for that) ==== Does anyone know how to get the 49 simplify 'sqrt(15*X*XROOT(3,X))' into something that the 49 will integrate? I was able to do it by hand for this example, I was just wondering if the calculator would do it for me. --CS BTW, how do I get to the radical symbol on the computer keyboard? ==== > Does anyone know how to get the 49 simplify 'sqrt(15*X*XROOT(3,X))' > into something that the 49 will integrate? I was able to do it by > hand for this example, I was just wondering if the calculator would do > it for me. You have a TI-89, don't you? It'll do this integral. > BTW, how do I get to the radical symbol on the computer keyboard? Character code 0xD6 in the Symbol font, at least on Windows. Try the Character Map (charmap.exe) -- Bhuvanesh ==== > Does anyone know how to get the 49 simplify 'sqrt(15*X*XROOT(3,X))' > into something that the 49 will integrate? I was able to do it by > hand for this example, I was just wondering if the calculator would do > it for me. The 49 seems to like radicals more than powers since it converts everything to powers... anyway, if you want the calculator to do this integral for you, a command I would use is TSIMP (EXP&LN,NXT,TSIMP or TRIG,NXT,NXT,TSIMP). It simplifies it to a form that the 49 can integrate with ease. I am not sure why the 49 can't directly integrate it, and why TSIMP would be required. Maybe a more knowledgeable person will answer that. Albert ==== > Does anyone know how to get the 49 simplify 'sqrt(15*X*XROOT(3,X))' > into something that the 49 will integrate? I was able to do it by > hand for this example, I was just wondering if the calculator would do > it for me. The 49 seems to like radicals more than powers since it converts everything > to powers... anyway, if you want the calculator to do this integral for you, > a command I would use is TSIMP (EXP&LN,NXT,TSIMP or TRIG,NXT,NXT,TSIMP). It > simplifies it to a form that the 49 can integrate with ease. I am not sure why the 49 can't directly integrate it, and why TSIMP would be > required. Maybe a more knowledgeable person will answer that. > Albert integrate it because it didn't look like 'sqrt(15)*XROOT(3,X)^2', which is what I got when I simplified it by hand. The HP will integrate it in that form, so when I didn't get that, I figured I still had more work to do. I guess we learn something new everyday. --CS ==== Does anyone know how to get the 49 simplify 'sqrt(15*X*XROOT(3,X))' > into something that the 49 will integrate? I was able to do it by > hand for this example, I was just wondering if the calculator would do > it for me. You have a TI-89, don't you? It'll do this integral. Ouch! I guess I kind of deserved that. Interestingly enough, the guy I was helping made a similar comment. > BTW, how do I get to the radical symbol on the computer keyboard? Character code 0xD6 in the Symbol font, at least on Windows. Try the > Character Map (charmap.exe) I tried using the character map, and the radical shows up as a 'v'. I'm not sure what to do with 0xD6, or how to change fonts in this window I'm typing in right now. Any changes I make only seem to affect text on the web page I'm viewing, not in input fields. How do I get a radical symbol into something I'm posting here? ==== > BTW, how do I get to the radical symbol on the computer keyboard? Character code 0xD6 in the Symbol font, at least on Windows. Try the > Character Map (charmap.exe) I'm not sure what to do with 0xD6, or how to change fonts in this > window I'm typing in right now. Any changes I make only seem to > affect text on the web page I'm viewing, not in input fields. How do I get a radical symbol into something I'm posting here? You can't. Not in any good way that guarantees that those who read your post will se the same symbol anyway. Fonts are not available in news. The best way is probably to either write the n-th root of x or x^(1/n) although mathematicians might argue that these two forms are not equivalent. ==== --------------------------------------------------------------------- If I could just hit a key after entering a command in the stack and read a basic description of the comand... Maybe, the stack syntax using text labels as stack entries, along with a short descriptive text. Need room? Eliminate the formula library. I love my HP-48GX, but the manuals are cumbersome. Toby ==== Toby :: > If I could just hit a key after entering a command in the stack and read > a basic description of the comand... Maybe, the stack syntax using text > labels as stack entries, along with a short descriptive text. Need > room? Eliminate the formula library. I love my HP-48GX, but the > manuals are cumbersome. You can not eliminate the formula library on HP48GX because it resides in ROM. This ROM is not rewritable. But if you really like your idea, then it is doable with some additional memory card, enthusiasm and not too mutch advertising before any form of release >:) -- Robert Tiismus ==== > Toby :: > If I could just hit a key after entering a command in the stack and > read a basic description of the comand... But if you really like your idea, then it is doable with some > additional memory card, enthusiasm and not too mutch advertising > before any form of release >:) Don't reinvent the wheel. Port SDIAG to the 48 instead. Thomas -- Thomas Rast There is no way to peace. Peace is the way! -- Gandhi ==== Thomas Rast :: >Toby :: If I could just hit a key after entering a command in the stack and >read a basic description of the comand... But if you really like your idea, then it is doable with some >additional memory card, enthusiasm and not too mutch advertising >before any form of release >:) > Don't reinvent the wheel. Port SDIAG to the 48 instead. What's SDIAG? I could not find it on hpcalc.org. Robert Tiismus Originator: mschaef@io.com (MSCHAEF.COM) ==== >-=-=-=-=-=- If I could just hit a key after entering a command in the stack and read >a basic description of the comand... Maybe, the stack syntax using text >labels as stack entries, along with a short descriptive text. This is a partial solution: http://www.hpcalc.org/details.php?id=1927 I've only used it myself on an SX, so I don't know if it works on a GX or a 49. -- http://www.mschaef.com ==== AFAIK the normal USAG won't work on the G(X) , but there seems to be a version of USAG for the G series, too. Raymond MSCHAEF.COM schrieb im Newsbeitrag >-=-=-=-=-=- If I could just hit a key after entering a command in the stack and read >a basic description of the comand... Maybe, the stack syntax using text >labels as stack entries, along with a short descriptive text. This is a partial solution: http://www.hpcalc.org/details.php?id=1927 I've only used it myself on an SX, so I don't know if it works on a GX or > a 49. > -- > http://www.mschaef.com <3EA70430.1060904@ut.ee> ==== > Thomas Rast :: >Toby :: If I could just hit a key after entering a command in the stack and >read a basic description of the comand... But if you really like your idea, then it is doable with some >additional memory card, enthusiasm and not too mutch advertising >before any form of release >:) > Don't reinvent the wheel. Port SDIAG to the 48 instead. > What's SDIAG? I could not find it on hpcalc.org. If my memory serves me right, it is an HP28S program that takes a command as an argument and displays all the possible argument types for this command. Small program, great job. But you didn't have a 'basic description'. On the HP49G, you can have one. -- ----- RM> Mauvais OS, changer d'OS (c)(r)(tm) J'ai windows 98 et comment faire pour changer l'os de windows 98? Dans ajout et suppression du programme et il ne parle pas d'os. -+- DN in : GNU -+- L'O.S. est las, h.8elas, c'est l.88 qu'est l'os -+- ==== > What's SDIAG? I could not find it on hpcalc.org. The one I mean is part of the Emacs package for the HP49 and is based on Carsten's Entry Database. It contains a lot of stack diagrams and for ML entries even short descriptions. The version I have on my 49 is about 85kB, but there are several to choose from, e.g. you can leave away the ML entries if you do not need them. Greetings Thomas -- Thomas Rast There is no way to peace. Peace is the way! -- Gandhi ==== Sure, I know that the formulas cannot be deleted, but since HP is working on a new line of calculators... In MS Excel there's a routine where it shows a window with blanks for function arguments. It helps build complicated formulas by integrating basic help text along with access to the worksheet addresses and the full help file, if needed. I mention this because I think something similar can be implemented in the successor of the HP-48GX (which the 49 isn't in my opinion). The INFORM command already takes several types of arguments from the stack and builds an usable entry form. This routine could be improved to optionally focus more on providing information (such as help info) rather than it's data entry function. If the HP-50GX can push help data to the stack in order to the improved INFORM command to read it, we not only get a basic help system, but a better INFORM command for our own help implementations in our programs. Other text displaying commands are read only, not quite suitable for the suggested ideas. Toby > Toby :: > If I could just hit a key after entering a command in the stack and read > a basic description of the comand... Maybe, the stack syntax using text > labels as stack entries, along with a short descriptive text. Need > room? Eliminate the formula library. I love my HP-48GX, but the > manuals are cumbersome. You can not eliminate the formula library on HP48GX because it resides in > ROM. This ROM is not rewritable. But if you really like your idea, then > it is doable with some additional memory card, enthusiasm and not too > mutch advertising before any form of release >:) -- > Tiismus > ==== in a SysRPL library, how can i call a xNAME inside another xNAME like a subroutine call (GOSUB or GOTO) ? Jorge Luis ==== have a look to ftp://ftp.math.fu-berlin.de/pub/usr/raut/hp49/ in time/timeman Wolfgang provides another man which is typical a synonym for a program which realy supports the user :-) Timeman allows doing this in a pleasant graphic environement which consist of invoked with Timeman's most important commands Dset and Tset. These can conveniently be toggled inside their environements and are described in Section 1 which concerns also the 3rd command Noon displaying the actual noon meridian on a word map... with HTML-docu. Many thanks to Wolfgang and best wishes Heiko ==== im searching for a real good User-RPL Programming Guide. OK there are still existing many documents but i'm still searching for the best one. But I found really nothing about HP-Basic for the HP49. Marc. ==== Marc Kamphausen schrieb > im searching for a real good User-RPL Programming Guide. OK there are still > existing many documents but i'm still searching for the best one. But I found really nothing about HP-Basic for the HP49. Search for HP48 on www.hpcalc.org for usrRPL it is for ?90% valid. HP-Basic is something which is slightly different to calculator language. ..Heiko ==== If I have say two vectors eg [ [1] [2] [3] ] and [ [2] [3] [4] ], how do I combine them into a singular matrix? eg. [ [1 2] [2 3] [3 4] ] (It's for large vectors. I'm actually trying to plot the power spectrum for a FFT.) Andrew ==== Programming? Some tools you need: ARRY-> ->ARRY ROW-> ->ROW COL-> ->COL LIST-> ->LIST DOLIST DOSUBS, NSUB, ENDSUB Veli-Pekka If I have say two vectors eg [ [1] [2] [3] ] and [ [2] [3] [4] ], how do I > combine them into a singular matrix? eg. [ [1 2] [2 3] [3 4] ] (It's for large vectors. I'm actually trying to plot the power spectrum for a > FFT.) Andrew ==== If I have say two vectors eg [ [1] [2] [3] ] and [ [2] [3] [4] ], how do I > combine them into a singular matrix? eg. try it with some linear algebra :-) [[1][2][3]] [[2][3][4]] [[0 1]] x SWAP [[1 0]] x + ==== If I have say two vectors eg [ [1] [2] [3] ] and [ [2] [3] [4] ], how do I >combine them into a singular matrix? eg. [ [1 2] [2 3] [3 4] ] (It's for large vectors. I'm actually trying to plot the power spectrum for a >FFT.) You probably mean a single matrix. In the context of matrices, 'singular' means having a determinant equal to zero. -- john ==== Dear all. This is not entirely linked to HP calculators but I guess I have more chance finding a solution here than anywhere else. Do you know where I could find the hardware specifications for creating a data collection device that can use the Vernier's different probes? All different searches have yield no result. ==== > Dear all. This is not entirely linked to HP calculators but I guess I have more chance > finding a solution here than anywhere else. Do you know where I could find the hardware specifications for creating a > data collection device that can use the Vernier's different probes? All different searches have yield no result. I don't know offhand, but you might try posting to sci.electronics.design. Surely this would depend upon the make/model of vernier? Alan ==== I don't know offhand, but you might try posting to > sci.electronics.design. Surely this would depend > upon the make/model of vernier? Well, what I'm after is the specification for the connector and the interface so I can have a device able to use vernier probes. ==== Talk to Detlef. He was involved in creating the aplet for Firmware I think. He'd probably be able to point you to someone even if he couldn't help you himself. > Dear all. This is not entirely linked to HP calculators but I guess I have more chance > finding a solution here than anywhere else. Do you know where I could find the hardware specifications for creating a > data collection device that can use the Vernier's different probes? All different searches have yield no result. ==== >Dear all. This is not entirely linked to HP calculators but I guess I have more chance >finding a solution here than anywhere else. Do you know where I could find the hardware specifications for creating a >data collection device that can use the Vernier's different probes? All different searches have yield no result. > Did you know that you can use the Vernier Universal Lab Interface to connect to the HP48GX? A graduate student in Physics at The University of Wisconsin at Oshkosh did it in 1997,I think. Use a search engine Loan. I got in in March of 2002 and copied it. Harold A. Climer Physics/Astronomy Lab Instructor U. Tennessee At Chattanooga ==== i guess you will have to find out the type of sensor (manufacturer and model number) they use. after that you will find out all the specs. they don't built sensors but just incorporate them into applications they'll provide you with the info. good luck > Dear all. This is not entirely linked to HP calculators but I guess I have more chance > finding a solution here than anywhere else. Do you know where I could find the hardware specifications for creating a > data collection device that can use the Vernier's different probes? All different searches have yield no result. > ==== >Dear all. This is not entirely linked to HP calculators but I guess I have more chance >finding a solution here than anywhere else. Do you know where I could find the hardware specifications for creating a >data collection device that can use the Vernier's different probes? All different searches have yield no result. > Here is a copy of his thesis Abstract Daniel F. Rosa Jr. Controlling the Universal Lab Interface with the Hewlett-Packard 48 Series Calculator Thesis Abstract for M. S. Degree in Physics - Instrumentation The Universal Lab Interface (ULI) is a device used in laboratories to collect data electronically. Normally, this device is controlled by a microcomputer. This thesis shows how the HP 48 series calculator, manufactured by Hewlett-Packard, can replace the microcomputer as a controlling device for the ULI. The HP 48 series calculator has serial interface capabilities and has serial data transmission rates that can be matched by the ULI. Programs were written using a form of BASIC called User-RPL for the calculator, that accesses the calculator's input buffer. The low cost of the calculator and programmability of the input buffer are just two features of the calculator that make this project feasible and cost effective for many applications. Two applications are shown that feature the versatility of the system incorporating the ULI with the Hewlett-Packard calculator. Different methods of data acquisition from the calculator's input buffer are discussed and compared. The programs used to send, receive and process command codes and data between the ULI and HP 48 calculator are included in this thesis. Also, a comparison between this system and a commercial product currently available is given. Harold A. Climer Physics/Astronomy Lab Instructor U. Tennessee At Chattanooga ==== > Well, what I'm after is the specification for the connector http://www.vernier.com/probes/specs/pinout.html > interface so I can have a device able to use vernier probes. the voltages levels, etc, will be in the manufacture's data sheet (specs). you will need to know the model of the sensor (example, something like a chip part number LMXXX). ==== for the connector see http://www.vernier.com/probes/specs/pinout.html Best wishes Manolo I don't know offhand, but you might try posting to > sci.electronics.design. Surely this would depend > upon the make/model of vernier? Well, what I'm after is the specification for the connector and the > interface so I can have a device able to use vernier probes. ==== > Did you know that you can use the Vernier Universal Lab Interface to > connect to the HP48GX? A graduate student in Physics at The University > of Wisconsin at Oshkosh did it in 1997,I think. Use a search engine own collecting device! ==== My default modulo value is 13. If I use the [MODE] [CAS] options to go to the CAS MENU, and move the cursor so that the modulo value is highlighted, the bottom of the screen says Enter modulo value. If I enter 3, or 3. for that matter, my calc says BAD ARGUMENT TYPE. If, however, I use the file manager and go to the CASDIR I find a integer veriable MODULO. Using edit, I can change the value to 3. IF I then go back to the CAS MENU my MODULO value is indeed 3. But after a warm start the value is back to 13. Why is the default value on my calculator 13, while all the books and manuals descripe that it should be 3? Also, why does my calculator not keep my modulo setting after a warm start? Should these CAS variables be in my HOME directory? I use the beta rom 1.19-6. Also, it happend that when I entered a vector , e.g. [LSHIFT][*][2][SPC][3][SPC][5][ENTER], the result is [2 3 5]. All numbers entered without a dot afterwards is used as integers and not real values. I suppose this is some flag or setting that has been changed, but I do not no which one or where to change it back again. Interestingly, if I have a vector in the form [2 3 5] and try to convert it from rectangular coordinates to say for instance spherical coordinates, it remains unchanged, although the same procedure alters a vector in the form [2. 3. 5.] to spherical coordinates. ZA ==== My default modulo value is 13. If I use the [MODE] [CAS] options to go > to the CAS MENU, and move the cursor so that the modulo value is > highlighted, the bottom of the screen says Enter modulo value. If I > enter 3, or 3. for that matter, my calc says BAD ARGUMENT TYPE. If, You should use integer values for CAS > however, I use the file manager and go to the CASDIR I find a integer > veriable MODULO. Using edit, I can change the value to 3. IF I then go > back to the CAS MENU my MODULO value is indeed 3. But after a warm > start the value is back to 13. << CASDIR 3 'MODULO' STO > STARTUP STO [ENTER] > Why is the default value on my calculator 13, while all the books and > manuals descripe that it should be 3? Also, why does my calculator not > keep my modulo setting after a warm start? Should these CAS variables > be in my HOME directory? I use the beta rom 1.19-6. That's why 13, there is no new manual for the beta... > Also, it happend that when I entered a vector , e.g. > [LSHIFT][*][2][SPC][3][SPC][5][ENTER], the result is [2 3 5]. All > numbers entered without a dot afterwards is used as integers and not > real values. I suppose this is some flag or setting that has been > changed, but I do not no which one or where to change it back again. Hold down shift & press ->NUM (it's in the [ENTER] key) to change between Approx. & Exact The annuciator in the top line is ~ & = repectively > Interestingly, if I have a vector in the form [2 3 5] and try to > convert it from rectangular coordinates to say for instance spherical > coordinates, it remains unchanged, although the same procedure alters > a vector in the form [2. 3. 5.] to spherical coordinates. The Integers in Matrices makes the Matrix to belong to the new Symbolic Matrix Data Type, which doesn't behave like the numerical Matrices. Note: You don't get any Symbolic Complex Numbers. You're welcome > ZA Veli PN ==== hmm, hmmm. First posting in this NG, and the only reason is: Someone who is not worth a penny. Well, I.82m german, in my opinion any war is useless. I visited the website you mention in your posting, well in Germany we would it) God please equip that scrap with brains. Greetz 2ndgear -- ________ Caesar Garcia schrieb im Newsbeitrag > www.francestinks.com What do you expect from a culture and a nation that exerted more of > its national will fighting against Disney World and Big Mac's than the > Nazis? As far as I'm concerned, war always means failure > -Jacques Chirac, President of France I'd rather have a German division in front of me than a French one > behind me. > -ral George S. Patton The only time France wants us to go to war is when the German Army is > sitting in Paris sipping coffee. > -Regis Philbin Q: How many Frenchmen does it take to defend Paris? > A: Nobody knows. They've never tried. Item placed on Ebay before it got pulled: > Surplus French Army Rifle: Never used, dropped once. Any bids? France has neither winter nor summer nor morals. Apart from these > drawbacks it is a fine country. France has usually been governed by > prostitutes. > -Mark Twain Going to war without France is like going duck hunting without your > accordion. > -Originally attributed to Donald Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense > but since corrected to have been said by Jed Babbin, Undersecretary of > Defense during the first Bush administration. ==== > www.francestinks.com What do you expect from a culture and a nation that exerted more of > its national will fighting against Disney World and Big Mac's than the > Nazis? As far as I'm concerned, war always means failure > -Jacques Chirac, President of France I'd rather have a German division in front of me than a French one > behind me. > -ral George S. Patton The only time France wants us to go to war is when the German Army is > sitting in Paris sipping coffee. > -Regis Philbin Q: How many Frenchmen does it take to defend Paris? > A: Nobody knows. They've never tried. Item placed on Ebay before it got pulled: > Surplus French Army Rifle: Never used, dropped once. Any bids? France has neither winter nor summer nor morals. Apart from these > drawbacks it is a fine country. France has usually been governed by > prostitutes. > -Mark Twain > > Going to war without France is like going duck hunting without your > accordion. > -Originally attributed to Donald Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense > but since corrected to have been said by Jed Babbin, Undersecretary of > Defense during the first Bush administration. Excuse my bad english. I'am either german nor french, but I don't understand the need of another NG. And it's very pitty to see which arguments he use. That don't give a good image of americans. Dimitri Missoh. ==== > hmm, hmmm. First posting in this NG, and the only reason is: Someone who is not worth a > penny. Well, I.82m german, in my opinion any war is useless. I visited the website you mention in your posting, well in Germany we would > it) God please equip that scrap with brains. ==== > After i press eval, it comes. Eval Error: Non algebraic in expression > What is my mistake??? Try running CASCFG. ==== > the answer should be 1/2 *x (sin(ln(x))-cos(ln(x))) I was trying to solve this equation for x, and it failed. Is there any way > to get an exact solution for this on the 49? No, numerical only, X=2.19328005074 ==== I was trying a few symbolic integration with my HP49G > and this one didn't work sin(ln(x)) the answer should be 1/2 *x (sin(ln(x))-cos(ln(x))) I was trying to solve this equation for x, and it failed. Is there any way > to get an exact solution for this on the 49? Which equation? I don't see an equation... -- Bhuvanesh ==== I was trying a few symbolic integration with my HP49G > and this one didn't work sin(ln(x)) the answer should be 1/2 *x (sin(ln(x))-cos(ln(x))) I was trying to solve this equation for x, and it failed. Is there any way > to get an exact solution for this on the 49? Which equation? I don't see an equation... Sorry for the confusion, I meant 1/2 *x (sin(ln(x))-cos(ln(x))). And please don't give me, The TI-89 can do this one easily. :) ==== The HP49G can integrate anything, as long as you use pencil and paper to help in some cases! Stan >I was trying a few symbolic integration with my HP49G >and this one didn't work sin(ln(x)) the answer should be 1/2 *x (sin(ln(x))-cos(ln(x))) >(The TI89 was doing it easily!) Yes, it can. It is done by IBP twice with the auxiliary function >being simply X 'SIN(LN(X))' >'X' IBP yields 'X*SIN(LN(X))' >'-COS(LN(X))' append another 'X and do another IBP which yields: 'X*SIN(LN(X))' >'-X*COS(LN(X))' >'-SIN(LN(X))' which means: 'SIN(LN(X))' = 'X*SIN(LN(X))' + '-X*COS(LN(X))' + '-SIN(LN(X))' Or, the solution is '(X*SIN(LN(X))-X*COS(LN(X)))/2' which >simplifies to the answer you gave. ``Put on your thinking cap.'' Randolph J. Herber, herber@dcdrjh.fnal.gov, +1 630 840 2966, CD/CDFTF PK-149F, >Mail Stop 318, Fermilab, Kirk & Pine Rds., PO Box 500, Batavia, IL 60510-0500, >USA. (Speaking for myself and not for US, US DOE, FNAL nor URA.) (Product, >trade, or service marks herein belong to their respective owners.) ==== > Which equation? I don't see an equation... Sorry for the confusion, I meant 1/2 *x (sin(ln(x))-cos(ln(x))). > And please don't give me, The TI-89 can do this one easily. :) The TI-89 can do this one easily ;-) Of course it can! The result is: x = e^(@n1*Pi-3*Pi/4) -- Bhuvanesh ==== > The HP49G can integrate anything, as long as you use pencil and paper > to help in some cases! any being can integrate any formula as well as it can give you the analytical solution to polynomial equation with n > 4 with all multipliers nonzero :) Sorry for being a little sarcastic, but there _ARE_ some problems whitch sipmly are not computable or soveable (is that the correct word?). Best wishes, Robert Tiismus ==== Thats ok I was being a little sarcastic also. Stan > The HP49G can integrate anything, as long as you use pencil and paper > to help in some cases! any being can integrate any formula as well as it can give you the >analytical solution to polynomial equation with n > 4 with all >multipliers nonzero :) Sorry for being a little sarcastic, but there >_ARE_ some problems whitch sipmly are not computable or soveable (is >that the correct word?). Best wishes, Robert Tiismus ==== > compute this number even without precise knowledge of the rules for leap > years. Amazing, isn't it? :-) Yes, it is. I don't see how, which makes me suspect that I'm missing > something obvious. you do. Your nice UsrRPL-program contains the leap year rules. You will > be surprised by solutions which don't explicitely refer to these rules. You have still another chance. Everybody (including the other poster on > his Challenge) should write the number of bytes and CRC of his program > (without name). Not necessary to repeot the story on the DATE argument. Ok, I've got one that's 84.5 bytes with a checksum of # 12A7h. It usually returns a real, sometimes a zint; is that ok? As you can no doubt guess, it takes a completely different approach to the problem from my previously posted program. Pure UserRPL, and with a minor change (which adds to the size), it should also work on any 48 series. -- ==== I've been beating my head against this, but haven't heard the secret word... I have however significantly refined my original attempt: .82 DUP IF -42 FS? THEN FP 2 ALOG * END IP IF DUP 2 == THEN DROP 6 ALOG * { 4 400 100 } MOD NOT EVAL NOT OR AND 28 + ELSE 1 - 7 MOD 2 MOD 31 - NEG NIP END é I took out the range test on the year (not called for in the requirements), found out that IF THEN ENDs are smaller than IFTs, found out that when doing modulus math don't have to clip out the year completely. Exponent ALOGs are smaller than 1Ewhatever. Got tricky applying the leap year rule. Enter in exact mode. Weighs in at 158.5 and #1D29h Anthony Mohrenweiser ==== > The 49-rompointer B3 A8 (same as the 48-rompointer B3 A9, documented in > the 48FAQ p.110, by JKH) computes the number of days of a month only > from begin 1991 till end of 2090. I've been using the FAQ at http://www.engr.uvic.ca/~aschoorl/faq/, which doesn't have page numbers, and, as far as I've been able to determine, lacks this information. Could you give us a URL where the FAQ you're referring to can be found? -- ==== schrieb > .82 DUP 100 * FP 1E4 * SWAP > -42 FC? .82 IP é > .82 FP 100 * IP é IFTE > OVER 5791 - ABS 4208 <= > .82 DUP 1 - 7 MOD 2 MOD 31 - NEG > SWAP 2 - > .82 NIP é > .82 2 - SWAP DUPDUP 4 MOD NOT ROT > 100 MOD ROT 400 MOD > NOT OR AND + é > IFTE > é > .82 DROP2 0 é IFTE > é > well... Looks good, really. 297 bytes and I think a lot of potential for a shorter program in sysRPL. Very impressiv are your constants 5791 and 4208. Would you please give a description of the algorithm. Best wishes Heiko ==== Wolfgang Rautenberg schrieb > The 49-rompointer B3 A8 (same as the 48-rompointer B3 A9, documented > in > the 48FAQ p.110, by JKH) computes the number of days of a month only I would like to know, where this rompointer is used on the mashines? > CHALLENGE. Write a shortest (a) 49-UsrRPL program (b) 49-SysRPL > program, > DOM say, whose input is a DATE from the interval 1583...9999, and > whose > output is the correct number of days of the month to which the input > DATE belongs. No argument or input protection is demanded. IMPORANT: > Your program must be independent on the date flag -42 ! (b) 49-SysRPL programm ROM 1-19.6 Code-Size: 92.5 Crc: 782Ch Output: Number of Days of the month (real) Algorithm: It is calculated the first of the next month and going one day back. Valid for the years from 1583 to 3199 (inclusive). (Above 3199 there might be a change of the rule rqd) Warning: The validity of the month is not checked. With an non existing month the program puts a flashptr on the stack: FlashPtrBkp I have not found in dokus what that does if evaluated :-( It sounds like Backup. My HP49 survived an EVAL for the pointer :-) ..Heiko PS: Carstens prog. (second edition) is wonderfull and for sure shorter than mine in sysRPL. Cathedral ;-) aka DOM %%HP: T(3)A(R)F(.); << :: ' :: %FP %1+ %31_ DATE+DAYS %FP %1+ %-1 DATE+DAYS %IP ; %0 ZEROZEROTWO DOBIND BINT42 SysITE 2GETEVAL :: DUP %IP %100 %/ SWAPDUP %2 TRCXY %- %+ BINT42 SetSysFlag 2GETEVAL BINT42 ClrSysFlag ; ABND ; @ > ==== > schrieb .82 DUP 100 * FP 1E4 * SWAP > -42 FC? .82 IP é > .82 FP 100 * IP é IFTE > OVER 5791 - ABS 4208 <= > .82 DUP 1 - 7 MOD 2 MOD 31 - NEG > SWAP 2 - > .82 NIP é > .82 2 - SWAP DUPDUP 4 MOD NOT ROT > 100 MOD ROT 400 MOD > NOT OR AND + é > IFTE > é > .82 DROP2 0 é IFTE > é well... Looks good, really. > 297 bytes > and I think a lot of potential for a shorter program in sysRPL. Actually, when I put this program into my 49G, I got 269 bytes with a checksum of # 6AA1h. Perhaps the difference is that I put all of his numbers, except 1E4, in as zints instead of reals. > Very impressiv are your constants 5791 and 4208. > Would you please give a description of the algorithm. Yes, I'm a bit curious about that too. But as far as I've tested, it does work. It seems to me that as it doesn't use the calculator's knowledge of dates, it could be modified to take two numbers for the date (the year standing alone), and work for dates way beyond the year 9999. -- ==== An old trick: A<=x<=B is usually coded ((A<=x) AND (x<=B)). However it is equivalent to abs(x - (A+B)/2) <= (B-A/2). If A and B are known and fixed then you can precompute and rally it is a little more efficient (depending on the language, not much here). The test .82 DUP 1583 >= SWAP 9999 <= AND é comes in at 37.5 bytes as opposed to .82 5791 - ABS 4208 <= é which comes to 32.5. I didn't bother to time them. I know that this is not in the running anymore, but for the sake of completeness here is my latest incarnation. I really think that this time I have sweated it down to size... I cleaned up the stack handling a little. The multiplication by 1000000 followed by division by 100 may seem a little weird but it leaves the quotient in level 2 and the remainder in level 1. The application of the leap year rules is still there, just a little more obscured. .82 IF -42 FS? THEN FP 2 ALOG * END DUP IF IP 2 == THEN 6 ALOG * 2 ALOG IDIV2 IF DUP THEN NIP ELSE DROP END 4 MOD NOT 28 + ELSE IP 1 - 7 MOD 2 MOD 31 - NEG END é This one weighs in at 152.5 and #AD29h. Ta, Anthony ==== to put the unexecuted object on the stack, DROP the count, and use BYTES on the object. But note that sometimes, an object changes size when it's stored in a variable. For example, if you put the real number 1. on the stack, then it's compiled as an address, 2.5 bytes, but if you store it in a variable and recall it to the stack, BYTES shows you that it's 10.5 bytes. A program is 10 bytes, but a program within a program is 12.5 bytes. Ultimately, I suppose that it depends on how the compiler treats the object, such as whether it compiles it as an object, address, or XLIB name, and whether it embeds it into another object where it needs to have a single object. The above information should be helpful in reducing the size of your programs, but I could be wrong on some things, and the sizes often. Experimentation is no doubt the best way to be certain. -- ==== PS: > The above information should be helpful in reducing the size of your > programs, but I could be wrong on some things, and the sizes often. > Experimentation is no doubt the best way to be certain. Make that: The above information should be helpful in reducing the size of your programs, but I could be wrong on some things, and the sizes often surprise me. Experimentation is no doubt the best way to be certain. -- ==== > (b) 49-SysRPL programm ROM 1-19.6 > Code-Size: 92.5 > :: > ' > :: > %FP > %1+ > %31_ > ... Heiko, although %31_ is a stable pointer (contained in the extable distributed with Emacs 11 and written by T. Rast), it is unsupported and hence not allowed in this contest :-(. A closer look at the problem also shows that nulllams are not really needed. Thus, perhaps you should try again :-) By the way, the unsupported but stable pointers contained in the mentioned extable remain valid for ROM 19-7 as far as I could observe hithertoo. This allows a much more efficient programming in SysRPL. We may be happy ... I'm still waiting on a contribution by Werner Huysegoms to this challenge (which must have fascinated him :-) before announcing the winning results. Also, a contribution from JKH would be very wellcome. My page reference to the 48-ROMPTR B3 A9 hacked by JKH refers to the latest PDF-edition of the 48FAQ on hpcalc.org. - Wolfgang ==== - My programming philosophy, especially on a calculator, has always been hammer to fit, file to hide, paint to cover.... I.e. whatever works. So I have been blithely using << Something > << Something else > IFTE constructs assuming they were the most efficient. Then I've come across Wolfgang's work and come to realize that those << > brackets aren't so innocuous. However, I would have bet real money that << DUP { NIP } { DROP } IFTE > was smaller than << IF DUP THEN NIP ELSE DROP END >. I was surprised... Anthony ==== > the 48-ROMPTR B3 A9 hacked by JKH refers to the latest PDF-edition of > the 48FAQ on hpcalc.org. I looked at that same page in the plain text file and managed to miss it. But I think that you mean B5 A9 for the 48, and presumably it would be B5 A8 on the 49G. -- ==== PS: usually returns a real, sometimes a zint; is that ok? As you can no > doubt guess, it takes a completely different approach to the problem > from my previously posted program. Pure UserRPL, and with a minor change (which adds to the size), it > should also work on any 48 series. I've got two more slight variations on this that I rather like a little better, but still at 84.5 bytes. Checksums # 8DB4h and # DB4Ah. -- ==== I would like to be able to transfer downloaded programs from my Mac (blue and white G3, OS 10.2.6) to my HP-48GX. How do I do that? I cannot seem to find the part number(s), or source for the connectivity kit, which I believe exists; all the information and software that I have managed to find any information about seems to be for PCs running Windows OS. Does anybody know (i) what the part number is for the software/hardware that I am seeking and (ii) where to get these items from? I have tried the HP site, but the available information is a little difficult to decipher. If you can help I would be extremely grateful -- I would like to be able to get my hands on this stuff before it disappears for ever. Please reply directly (slockyer@cox.net), if possible. Many thanks, Simon ==== > X > In fact more accurate than the 12C in > some cases (not that the extra accuracy justifies the extra > computation time - convergence is so rapid near an answer): > n=E 8 i=1.234567891 E-6 PV=0 PMT=.01 > Solve for FV=-1,973,883.396 12CP: -1,973,883.143 12C: -1.973,883.296 19BII: -1,973,883.39591 49G: -1,973,883.39591 You just used 12 payments/yr on your hp49 instead of 1. > I get -1,973,883.39591 on the 49 and 48 ... Oops! That's how I *always* calculate my loans! Set to 1/yr => Both the 19BII & 49G is same as yours Question remains: does the problem already exceed a reasonable accuracy limit at this point? > I think that you have already went past the accuracy limit here. > Any ideas of an easier calculation? > Now resolve for i - I didn't measure how long it took -maybe > 2.5 minutes, but the answer was 1.23456790 E-6. That is > MUCH better than the 12C which gives 1.235555343 E-6, not that > the 12C was known for great accuracy - and of course that > didn't dampen it's popularity. The 12C does it in about 5 > seconds as against something like 150 in the 12c-pt. > X ==== +----------------------------------------------+ | Tue, 20.5.03 06:48 a.m. +1200 (NZT) | +----------------------------------------------+ in message ID <3ec8eedd$1_3@hpb10302.boi.hp.com> : Wired, on my 12c platinum, it takes less that 3 second to solve pmt for n=10, i=10, > pv=100, fv=0 can you give me the serial number of your calculator? CN31301335, with the last digit stamped almost like an exponent. Solving for PMT is not the problem. *Resolving* for *i* is the problem. Example f CLEAR FIN n=10 pv=100 pmt=-20 solve for i. On the original 12C this takes 15 seconds. Solving for i again takes 4 seconds, as the original 12C uses the existing i as part of its initial guess. On the new 12c platinum it takes 35 seconds.Pressing i again takes another 35 seconds. This implies that the new platinum 12c does not re-use the existing i as part of the initial guess strategy. Tony There is something very strange about the new 12c platinum. > Resolving for i is, one could say, no longer possible. My one > displays running for so long I have to press the ON key. I > have tried many simple examples now. If indeed it does resolve, before running bateries flat, it > must take a very long time. Oh, it did work n=10 i=10 pv=100 fv=0 solve for pmt=-162.745 > resolve for i ... it seems to take 40 seconds. On the classic gold 12C it takes 4 seconds. This is, believe me, an example that is favourable to the 12c > platinum. Unfortunately this does make it a returnable item, unless one > really likes bugs like this. - Tony -- Tony Hutchins Wellington New Zealand #105 An ounce of discretion is worth a pound of learning. Proverb ==== +----------------------------------------------+ | Tue, 20.5.03 07:17 a.m. +1200 (NZT) | +----------------------------------------------+ in message ID : > n=E 8 i=1.234567891 E-6 PV=0 PMT=.01 > Solve for FV=-1,973,883.396 > 12CP: -1,973,883.143 > 12C: -1.973,883.296 No, both those have the correct fraction =.396 The HP92 and HP37E give the same. > 19BII: -1,973,883.39591 > 49G: -1,973,883.39591 > Question remains: does the problem already exceed a > reasonable accuracy limit at this point? Not at all. The problem is in resolving for i. Even on the HP41, a simple FIN program, using Newton Raphson for the i solution, quickly recovers the full 10 digits in i. On the HP41 the user has less precision available than the internal programs appear to use. The problem is with the slowness of the 12CP in resolving for i. I was really surprised to see this. Then I thought - Well, maybe there is a work-around - like on the 12C it uses the i already stored as an initial guess. But this seems to have been removed on the 12CP!!! I never thought anyone would tamper with the 12C TVM code for the i iterative solution, in the slightest. As it is though, it must use an method that converges very very slowly. I can't even imagine what that could be. It definitely needs the old 12C trick of taking the existing i as an initial guess. -- Tony Hutchins Wellington New Zealand #135 If you want to be happy, be. Leo Tolstoy ==== > Question remains: does the problem already exceed a reasonable > accuracy limit at this point? What is 'reasonable'? in this context? 10^8 years is hardly a 'reasonable' number, but you might plug that sort of number in as a lazy man's substitute for 'perpetual bond'. Or do you mean 'reasonable' as in as good as we can expect from the underlying floating point? Or... calculate the NPV of the error and you'll be shocked! dd. ==== X > The problem is in resolving for i. X Preproduction units do have bugs... ==== In message , David Davies > X > In fact more accurate than the 12C in > some cases (not that the extra accuracy justifies the extra > computation time - convergence is so rapid near an answer): > n=E 8 i=1.234567891 E-6 PV=0 PMT=.01 > Solve for FV=-1,973,883.396 > 12CP: -1,973,883.143 > 12C: -1.973,883.296 > 19BII: -1,053,250.72188 > 49G: -1,053,250.72188 You just used 12 payments/yr on your hp49 instead of 1. I get -1,973,883.39591 on the 49 and 48 ... > 200LX gives -1,973,883.395908565 -- ==== +----------------------------------------------+ | Tue, 20.5.03 3:53 p.m. +1200 (NZT) | +----------------------------------------------+ in message ID : >I get -1,973,883.39591 on the 49 and 48 ... > 200LX gives -1,973,883.395908565 the 200LX and the HP49 resolve for i% perfectly as well. Now I remember - I think that internally the 12C, and probably all earlier HP Finacial calcs find solutions internally for (1+i) rather than just i. That 1 helps knock off significance. This is just a guess - I think the HP FINANCE pack did that. The funny thing is I really quite like the 12c platinum. At first I honestly thought it could *not* solve for i, it was taking so long. I couldn't imagine it remembering to finish. But, now I am confident it does finish I can happily make coffee while it's working :) -- Tony Hutchins Wellington New Zealand #74 All taglines are busy..One will be with you shortly. ==== All I want to do is save certain results (store them) so I can recall them later. I have a very old hp41CV where it is quite simple. I get a result hit store assign a number from 01 to 99 and when I want that value again I simply hit recall and the number I assigned as the storage bin. On the hp49g I can't seem to do this. For example: I've entered 5/9 that I'd like to reuse to convert Fahrenheit to Celsius. When I hit STO on the 49g I get the following error. STO Error: Bad argument type. What's the deal. In the manual it says I can store values by assigning them as variables. For some reason my calculator won't allow me to do it. Any suggestions on how to perform this simple task? Tom ==== I don't have a 49g, but I assume it works as a 48 for that. When you want to store whatever is on the first level of the stack, just hit the ' key, and type the name you want to assign, e.g. 'result' then hit STO. To recall it, just type the name you assigned or press the key corresponding in the vars menu. Hope that helped. indyguy151 a .8ecrit dans le message de > All I want to do is save certain results (store them) so I can recall them > later. I have a very old hp41CV where it is quite simple. I get a result hit > store assign a number from 01 to 99 and when I want that value again I > simply hit recall and the number I assigned as the storage bin. On the > hp49g I can't seem to do this. For example: I've entered 5/9 that I'd like to reuse to convert Fahrenheit > to Celsius. When I hit STO on the 49g I get the following error. STO Error: > Bad argument type. What's the deal. In the manual it says I can store values > by assigning them as variables. For some reason my calculator won't allow me > to do it. Any suggestions on how to perform this simple task? Tom ==== Okay, thanks...that worked. Now how to I delete the value I stored in the variable? Tom > I don't have a 49g, but I assume it works as a 48 for that. > When you want to store whatever is on the first level of the stack, just hit > the ' key, and type the name you want to assign, e.g. 'result' then hit STO. > To recall it, just type the name you assigned or press the key > corresponding in the vars menu. Hope that helped. > indyguy151 a .8ecrit dans le message de > All I want to do is save certain results (store them) so I can recall them > later. I have a very old hp41CV where it is quite simple. I get a result > hit > store assign a number from 01 to 99 and when I want that value again I > simply hit recall and the number I assigned as the storage bin. On the > hp49g I can't seem to do this. For example: I've entered 5/9 that I'd like to reuse to convert Fahrenheit > to Celsius. When I hit STO on the 49g I get the following error. STO > Error: > Bad argument type. What's the deal. In the manual it says I can store > values > by assigning them as variables. For some reason my calculator won't allow > me > to do it. Any suggestions on how to perform this simple task? Tom ==== Figured it out...Purge. Bring up the variable...then hit purge. > Okay, thanks...that worked. Now how to I delete the value I stored in the > variable? Tom I don't have a 49g, but I assume it works as a 48 for that. > When you want to store whatever is on the first level of the stack, just > hit > the ' key, and type the name you want to assign, e.g. 'result' then hit > STO. > To recall it, just type the name you assigned or press the key > corresponding in the vars menu. Hope that helped. > indyguy151 a .8ecrit dans le message de > All I want to do is save certain results (store them) so I can recall > them > later. I have a very old hp41CV where it is quite simple. I get a result > hit > store assign a number from 01 to 99 and when I want that value again I > simply hit recall and the number I assigned as the storage bin. On the > hp49g I can't seem to do this. For example: I've entered 5/9 that I'd like to reuse to convert > Fahrenheit > to Celsius. When I hit STO on the 49g I get the following error. STO > Error: > Bad argument type. What's the deal. In the manual it says I can store > values > by assigning them as variables. For some reason my calculator won't > allow > me > to do it. Any suggestions on how to perform this simple task? Tom ==== There's also shortcuts for recalling and reassigning objects that are stored in variables. [RS] and the function key currently assigned to that variable will store whatever's on level 1 of the stack into that variable (i.e. if I have stored 20 in the variable 'A' and I want it to be 15, I would type 15 [ENTER] [RS] [F1] assuming that 'A' is in [F1]). If I want to recall whatever is in a variable (such as a program that I want to edit) I would hit [LS] and the corresponding function key. This recalls the object versus executing the object. Really useful with programs. Be careful though. It's real easy to get the two commands mixed up. As far as I know, there's no way to undo it either. I've accidentally stored numbers into variables that previously had fairly long programs in them. I had to retype the program. I realize that this is review for a lot of the readers of this NG, maybe even the original poster, but I owned the calculator for probably about two years before I found out about this trick. Until then, I didn't have an easy way of re-assigning variables. ==== X > Be careful though. It's real easy to get the two commands mixed up. > As far as I know, there's no way to undo it either. I've accidentally > stored numbers into variables that previously had fairly long programs > in them. I had to retype the program. X On keyboard shortcut [LeftShift] [name] if you press [LS] [ANS] immediately, you'll get the old values back to stack (RPN-mode). Naturally your most important programs are in FlashRAM. ==== I'm auctioning a HP 15C on ebay http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=11713&item=3024701728 ==== Wrong newsgroup. Use www.hpmuseum.org , Ads section kelmark schrieb im Newsbeitrag > I'm auctioning a HP 15C on ebay http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=11713&item=3024701728 ==== On my HP48G the transistor T1 on the left bottom side of pcb is out! It's a transistor (with 4 pins) at the same level of the blue self. If you can read the reference of this component, can you send me it. ==== > The 48 and 49 (and 28C) have a big advantage over the 12C with > their built-in UTPN functions. If they were functions - as in usable in the equation writer and > quoted expressions - I'd be a happy man! You can make them functions... ==== > The 48 and 49 (and 28C) have a big advantage over the 12C with > their built-in UTPN functions. If they were functions - as in usable in the equation writer and > quoted expressions - I'd be a happy man! > You can make them functions... Of course, and the first thing I did after trying to use UTPN in the 'obvious' way was wrap it in angled brackets. But why on earth was it defined this way? Is it a hangover from the hp28? And why was it left this way for so long (48g/1993, 49g/1999)? dd. ==== +----------------------------------------------+ | Tue, 20.5.03 07:11 a.m. +1200 (NZT) | +----------------------------------------------+ in message ID <7fcf10a1.0305190815.6a03f072@posting.google.com> : > 1. My Black-Scholes ran in 8 seconds as against 12 seconds on > the 12C gold. Hey! When will we see that program for the 12C? In Datafile maybe? Yes, quite likely! It seems worth publishing as although it is a 99 line program, it only uses 4 registers as temporary storage, in addition to having the inputs in the TVM registers. No special constants need to be stored. - Tony ==== The 48 and 49 (and 28C) have a big advantage over the 12C with > their built-in UTPN functions. If they were functions - as in usable in the equation writer and > quoted expressions - I'd be a happy man! > You can make them functions... Of course, and the first thing I did after trying to use UTPN in the > 'obvious' way was wrap it in angled brackets. But why on earth was it > defined this way? Is it a hangover from the hp28? And why was it > left this way for so long (48g/1993, 49g/1999)? dd. Life is short ,ROM is full. Originally there was no room to make all functions 'functions' Now I will give you a mission impossible: to a function. Like the UTPN and it's relatives, then HMS+, etc. ==== > Originally there was no room to make all functions 'functions' > Now I will give you a mission impossible: > to a function. Like the UTPN and it's relatives, then HMS+, etc. Well, the way you have to use UTPN at the moment means that the second thing (after the TVM solver) that any quantitatively switched-on MBA is going to try on the machine - i.e. putting the simplest option pricing formulae into the equation writer - will fail. Having to resort to a hack to use straightforward things like a normal probability function makes the firmware look really shabby. dd. ==== X > Well, the way you have to use UTPN at the moment means that the second > thing (after the TVM solver) that any quantitatively switched-on MBA > is going to try on the machine - i.e. putting the simplest option > pricing formulae into the equation writer - will fail. Having to > resort to a hack to use straightforward things like a normal > probability function makes the firmware look really shabby. One could try the ALGebraic tick trick: `UTPN(m,s^2,x)=Y'` or :: `Y-UTPN(mean,var,X)` DTAG but what good does it? ==== Time is critical in this exam. I do not like the format but do not know how to make it display better. I believe it could be make more efficient also. It would be great to see all the results display at the same time. Example input sigma x: -140 sigma y: 205 tau xy: 100 Results Principle stress Sigma pa: 231.89 Sigma pb: -166.89 Max shear stress: 199.39 Angle of orientation of principal stress with principal x-axis -15.05, 74.95 Angle of orientation of max shear plane 29.95, 119.95 program is listed below dashed line -------------------- pSTRES2 .82 235x .9dy .9cxy PROMPT ô .9dx .9dy .9cxy .82 .9dx .9dy + 2 / .9dx .9dy - 2 / 2 ^ .9cxy 2 ^ + ¡ + '.9dpa' ôTAG .9dx .9dy + 2 / .9dx .9dy - 2 / 2 ^ .9cxy 2 ^ + ¡ - '.9dpb' ôTAG .9dx .9dy - 2 ^ .9cxy 2 * 2 ^ + .5 ^ 2 / '.9cmax' ôTAG .9cxy 2 * .9dx .9dy - / ATAN 2 / '[Eth]px[CapitalEth]axis' ôTAG DUP 90 + .9dx .9dy - .9cxy -2 * / ATAN 2 / '[Eth].9c.9d' ôTAG DUP 90 + é é ==== pSTRES2 > .82 > ~x ~y Txy PROMPT > .93 ~x ~y Txy > .82 ~x ~y + > 2 / ~x ~y - 2 / 2 ^ > Txy 2 ^ + f + '~pa' > .93TAG ~x ~y + 2 / ~x > ~y - 2 / 2 ^ Txy 2 > ^ + f - '~pb' .93TAG > ~x ~y - 2 ^ Txy 2 * > 2 ^ + .5 ^ 2 / > 'Tmax' .93TAG Txy 2 * > ~x ~y - / ATAN 2 / > '.px-axis' .93TAG DUP > 90 + ~x ~y - Txy -2 > * / ATAN 2 / '.T~' > .93TAG DUP 90 + > é > é I don't know about mohr's circle, but if you'd do 3 TRANSIO on your calculator before transferring the object, then it would be somewhat easier to read in the newsgroup, and perhaps in your text editor as well. -- ==== > Interesting thread again. > > A few points : > > - The 9600 and its very slightly improved version the 9650 are old > > news, I think more than 4 years old. You are right: as far as I know the newest Sharp calculator is > the EL-9900N (last quarter of 2002). > Moreover, the EL-9650's display is not much readable, as well as > the display of the EL-9400, and their contrast regulation is useless. > Luckily, the display of the EL-9900N is quite good, comparable with the > display of the HP48GX (my machine of choice). This is true. The screen on the 9600 suffers from a bad readability due to the extra layer of the touch screen. However, the 9400 has no touch screen, so it should have a much better contrast (I don't have this one). > > Last, I used the 9600 a while in the past, and if you never need to > > program anything this is a great machine. The pen interface is a very > > strong point on this product. > > Well, let's say it would have been a nice machine, with a decent display... > I used it mainly for its stat functions, but the poor display is a bit > tedious, and IMHO the pen-touch screen is just a useless gadget: > I have been pleased by the fact that the EL-9900N has traded the pen-touch > screen for a good display, yet it features an other useless gadget, > a detachable reversible keyboard. Granted, while I maintain that the touch screen has some value... YMMV ! ==== I am a die-hard HP49 user. My wife is a psychology student and is currently looking for a calculator that will do statistics. I want her to buy an HP, but I'm having a hard time convincing her to get one. I went to their website, and couldn't find anything there that was better than TI's equivalant. What is HP's good statistical calculator? Where can I find it? ==== It appears the new HP idea of an advanced scientific calculator is a Casio knock off. Very sad. I was looking for something to get my son and daughter but HP's current range has nothing to recomend them. > I am a die-hard HP49 user. My wife is a psychology student and is > currently looking for a calculator that will do statistics. I want > her to buy an HP, but I'm having a hard time convincing her to get > one. I went to their website, and couldn't find anything there that > was better than TI's equivalant. What is HP's good statistical calculator? Where can I find it? ==== HP 48G/G+ might be ideal or, if the HP 39G/40G is cheaper, then that. The statistic samples are gathered into a matrix so individual entries can be examined later and naturally the computing precision is better. One can also find huge amount of statistical programs for these models. www.hpcalc.org > It appears the new HP idea of an advanced scientific calculator is a Casio > knock off. Very sad. I was looking for something to get my son and > daughter but HP's current range has nothing to recomend them. I am a die-hard HP49 user. My wife is a psychology student and is > currently looking for a calculator that will do statistics. I want > her to buy an HP, but I'm having a hard time convincing her to get > one. I went to their website, and couldn't find anything there that > was better than TI's equivalant. What is HP's good statistical calculator? Where can I find it? ==== I was so tired of complaining about th faulty capacitor of my HP 49G China and getting no results that I decided to ask for it in HP Argentina. Once in my house, I opened the calculator softly. I took out the faulty capacitor, a 6.3 volt 1000uf one. I went to a electronic store and bought a replacement. The new one was a 16volt 1000uf capacitor. You might wonder why I put this instead of the original values??? HP 49G uses the batteries, each one of 1,5 volt. connected in series it is 4,5 volt. I electronics we use a security margen (donÇt know how to write it in english. sorry) of 40%. Then: 4,5 volt * 40% security = 6.3 Volt , yes! the same the original capacitor said. Well, you should know that the volts we read on a capacitor is the maximum difference of potencial it can support. But, why use a 6.3 volt capacitor if we use 4.5 volt??? The security margen is to increase the capacitor life, because they want last for ever. They work with a chemical reaction inside (the dielectric, and other stuff). The capacitor that comes with HP 49G from china has the right size values. But it is of really bad quality, not lasting even 2 years. When the voltage of the capacitor is higher it will last more. More working life. Ok. But isnÇt the 16 volt 1000uf capacitor bigger than the original??? YEs, but i have manage to put it in with out any trouble. I put it beside the batteries compartment. I will upload the pictures soon. Finally I would like to thank Jean-Ives for regreting about his first statement (please look up in previous messages if you donÇt know what IÇm talking about, HP might have a strong pressure above him) and HP of USA and Argentina for giving no rational solution for my problem. Esteban Suarez Marenzi Pd: This is the best part: Hp wanted me to pay u$s 130.- for a replacement. I fixed the calculator myself with a cost of $ 0,6.- (pesos argentinos). In dollars it is u$s 0,2.- JAJA BELIEVE IT OR NOT HP!!! YOU TRIED TO BLACK MAILED ME, BUT YOU COULDNÇT. IN YOUR FACE HP!!! ==== > The capacitor that comes with HP 49G from china has the right size > values. But it is of really bad quality, not lasting even 2 years. > When the voltage of the capacitor is higher it will last more. More > working life. ==== > X > Sometimes defining a bug is a bit subjective; do we define it as > doesn't work as was asked for, doesn't work as the developer > intended, doesn't work as documented, or doesn't work as the user > wants it to? Or perhaps some other criterion? > If it crashes, hangs-up, runs forever => it's a serious bug! > The same with wrong answers (not counting the trailing last digits) > Leaving carbage on the Stack. Not functioning at all....??? > X Agreed, but what about commands that change a mode and don't restore it? Or commands that return a mathematically correct answer, but not in a form that the user expected, and sometimes appearing much more complicated than expected? Or a command like IP, which I might expect to return a zint, but returns a real? Or test commands that may return either a zint or a real, depending on the arguments? > Including the Pacific would make California and Italy so small that one > couldn't recognize them as peninsulas on the 48/49 screen :-) > A scollable map? Perhaps, but Wolfgang seems to dislike using extra nibbles. Actually, I still like SUNCLK, but it might be nice to show the noon meridian on it. Maybe the midnight meridian as well? But on the 49G, the alarm index and any immediately following valid > objects from the control alarm are entered into the matrix, and any > invalid object and anything following it is left on the matrix writer's > edit line. > X > Dare I call it buggy? This could stand some improvement; even just going > back to the way the 48 series handled it would be much better. > BUG it is, ACO has failed... Yes, I'd dare to call this one a definite bug. With all the possible special environments on the 49G, I've tested only a few of them for what happens when a control alarm comes due. For some, like the equation writer, and if I recall correctly, the filer, a control alarm runs in the background, not disrupting the user save for (I suspect) keypresses aren't taken out of the key buffer until the alarm finishes. Or maybe the alarm is delayed until the special environment is left? I'm not certain offhand. But I don't know what happens if an alarm comes due when sending or receiving from the filer. > I wonder if it is possible to start yet another Environment eg. use Virtual > Stack > for control alarms in the 49G alarm system... Yes, I've wondered about that. Perhaps any running program could be interrupted with any current stack saved as a virtual stack, the alarm could leave objects on the stack, with any saved stack put back on below the alarm results, and the program resumed. It seems to me that this wouldn't interfere with most running programs (except for delaying their completion). But on second thought, if the program uses DEPTH, then the extra objects on the stack would cause DEPTH to return an unexpected result. I've written some programs that would fail with this method. Perhaps if a program is running, then it could be suspended, the alarm run, any results from the alarm saved in a virtual stack, the program CONTinued, and any alarm results put back on the bottom of the stack after the program finishes. Offhand, this seems better to me. But actually, the current method of delaying any control alarm until any running program finishes seems pretty good. True, some alarms may not run exactly on time, but maybe for alarms that *must* run at the exact time, we could say that it's the user's responsibility to ensure that no program is running when the alarm comes due. If in any special environment, then it could be restored if needed when the alarm finishes; for example, the command line could be restarted with the saved command line. The virtual stack seems to be designed for situations like this, but perhaps ACO, like the Corvallis team before them, found that Life is short and ROM is full. Or even more likely for both teams, time to market a product was short; if you never decide that the product is good enough, then you'll never market anything. -- ==== The program is cool. But i had a Problem with the Hpcomm prog, is not a real Problem. After i transfer a file to the Hp 49 the HPcpmm open windows with Hf1 is a Verzeichnis and so on . Ok i can close this windows but is a little disturb. Can you solve this Problem? Greetings Achim Andreas Moeller schrieb: those of you who are interested in letting your 49G (ROM 1.19-6 only) >almost completly speak another language may want to try 'Deutsche >Meldungen 1.0' available on www.hpcalc.org. Creating another language is easy but laborious: Just split the lib >and replace all messages with your own. >Greetings, >Andreas > > ==== WD-40 ! The WD = Water Displacement Formula 40. It is not electrically conductive. Is great for cell phones dropped in the toilet. Fill it up through any open hole (battery compartment?). Then use the sock to get the oil out. You may have to wash your hands after balancing your checkbook for a while, the buttons might feel funny afterwards, but boy will they be silent! John E (I also don't assume responsibility if this doesn't work. I haven't squirted WD40 into any calculator yet. This is all theoretical.) > I think it's too late for that. > Maybe one could sink it into alcohol and when the sugar-coffee > is off (after a minute?or 10) then use the (t)rusty sock-method... Beware of security holes in your system - you may crash your HP !! PS: I don't take any responsibility if decide to follow any advice > OR not to follow it... updated version 1.0 ;) > just put it in a *sock* and spin it around > PS: the circuitry inside my head must be rusting ==== >WD-40 ! The WD = Water Displacement Formula 40. It is not electrically >conductive. Is great for cell phones dropped in the toilet. >Fill it up through any open hole (battery compartment?). >Then use the sock to get the oil out. >You may have to wash your hands after balancing your checkbook for a while, >the buttons might feel funny afterwards, but boy will they be silent! John E (I also don't assume responsibility if this doesn't work. I haven't squirted >WD40 into any calculator yet. This is all theoretical.) > We used to get two way radios at Icom America where the owner sprayed the unit with WD-40. We just sent them back un repaired. WD-40 makes a real mess of electronics. It is hard to clean off the circuit board for any needed repairs, sometimes swells plastic and rubber parts. I would not recommend doing this. Best to remove any batteries as quick as possible, then flush, flush, flush with clean water, distilled is best. If you can open the unit that is the very best way. Liquids like coffee, colas, dirty water are very corrosive and need to be removed quickly. Once air gets into the unit with the liquid corrosion starts and its all down hill from there. Gary K8IZ ==== You gave me the right tip. You make only one fault. Veli-Pekka Nousiainen schrieb: >s*C2*(Uc-Ua)=Ua/R2 >----- >s*C1*Uc=I1-I2 >[ I1= -(Uc-Ue)/R1 I2=Ua/R2 ] >SUBST => @ you may also substitute one at a time >s*C1*Uc=-(Uc-Ue)/R1-Ua/R2 >finally you make a vector from those s*... >and another vector [Ua Ue] and use LINSOLVE >[ s*C2*(Uc-Ua)=Ua/R2 s*C1*Uc=-(Uc-Ue)/R1-Ua/R2] >[ Ua Ue ] >LINSOLVE => @ take a brake! Read the Bible! >.... > I think this is a fault - not the reading of the bible, I think linsolve is the fault. I my opinion you must solve one of this equation to Uc and then substitute the Uc in the other equation and then you have only one equation without Uc, I2 and I1. yeah, that is it. :-) And now i solve the equation to Ua and Uc. >it seems that your system is under determined (or I lack math skills) >since Uc is still there...sorry. >Anyone with more brains, skill and patient out there? > And now i have the next Problem. After i expand the solution, i become this: (s*Ue*R2*C2) Ua= ------------------------------------------------------------ (sî*R2*R1*C2+s*R1)*C1+(s*R1+s*R2)*C2+1 The first Problem with this is i want to eliminate the brackets. And the second Problem is i want R1*C1 substitute with T1 and R2*C2 substitute with T2. Can i do this??? Achim ==== You gave me the right tip. You make only one fault. Veli-Pekka Nousiainen schrieb: X > And now i have the next Problem. > After i expand the solution, i become this: (s*Ue*R2*C2) > Ua= ------------------------------------------------------------ > (sî*R2*R1*C2+s*R1)*C1+(s*R1+s*R2)*C2+1 The first Problem with this is i want to eliminate the brackets. > And the second Problem is i want R1*C1 substitute with T1 and R2*C2 > substitute with T2. > Can i do this??? Sure (beware of mistakes I make without Jolt Cola) 1) That EQ in Stack press down arrow to start the EQuation Writer Select individually the lower part first term and FACTOR then second and FACTOR (you may also apply FACTOR to the +1 if you wish) 2) 'R2*C2=T2' SUBST and then go again to FACTOR the two pieces 'R1*C1=T1' SUBST and then go one more time to FACTOR but...oh no! since there is a term R1*C2 in your orginal equation you cant simplify it more, there will always be a C2/C1 term. T2*Ue*s Ua= ------------------------------------------------------------ s*(T2*C1+T1*C2) T1*s*(s*T2+1) + ---------------------- + 1 C1 ==== Veli-Pekka Nousiainen schrieb: > (s*Ue*R2*C2) >Ua= ------------------------------------------------------------ > (sî*R2*R1*C2+s*R1)*C1+(s*R1+s*R2)*C2+1 > Sure (beware of mistakes I make without Jolt Cola) 1) That EQ in Stack press down arrow to start the EQuation Writer >Select individually the lower part first term and FACTOR then second >and FACTOR (you may also apply FACTOR to the +1 if you wish) > > ok i do this, but the C1 by the term (sî*R2*R1*C2+s*R1)*C1 are still out of the bracket.C2 by the next term too. >2) >'R2*C2=T2' SUBST and then go again to FACTOR the two pieces >'R1*C1=T1' SUBST and then go one more time to FACTOR >but...oh no! since there is a term R1*C2 in your orginal equation >you cant simplify it more, there will always be a C2/C1 term. > Oh, i do this yesterday and nothing happens, but at this morning it is going. I think i was to tired and my caffeine level was very low.:-) I forget to say that R1*C2=T12!!! But I substitute first R2*C2=T2, then substitute R1*C1=T1 and now is i want to substitute R1*C2=T12 but ... no R1*C2 term left over. oh noooooo. Is not a great Problem because i can substitute this on the Paper, but it want to be nice i can do this with the HP. ( i know bad grammar ;-) ) Achim > > ==== Veli-Pekka Nousiainen schrieb: (s*Ue*R2*C2) >Ua= ------------------------------------------------------------ > (sî*R2*R1*C2+s*R1)*C1+(s*R1+s*R2)*C2+1 >Sure (beware of mistakes I make without Jolt Cola) 1) That EQ in Stack press down arrow to start the EQuation Writer >Select individually the lower part first term and FACTOR then second >and FACTOR (you may also apply FACTOR to the +1 if you wish) > ok i do this, but the C1 by the term (sî*R2*R1*C2+s*R1)*C1 are still > out of the bracket.C2 by the next term too. 2) >'R2*C2=T2' SUBST and then go again to FACTOR the two pieces >'R1*C1=T1' SUBST and then go one more time to FACTOR >but...oh no! since there is a term R1*C2 in your orginal equation >you cant simplify it more, there will always be a C2/C1 term. Oh, i do this yesterday and nothing happens, but at this morning it is > going. > I think i was to tired and my caffeine level was very low.:-) > I forget to say that R1*C2=T12!!! > But I substitute first R2*C2=T2, then substitute R1*C1=T1 and now is i > want to substitute R1*C2=T12 > but ... no R1*C2 term left over. oh noooooo. > Is not a great Problem because i can substitute this on the Paper, but > it want to be nice i can do this with the HP. > ( i know bad grammar ;-) ) > They *are* useful (in spite of errors) if you learn how to use the EQW Now back to the problem: (s*Ue*R2*C2) Ua= ------------------------------------------------------------ (sî*R2*R1*C2+s*R1)*C1+(s*R1+s*R2)*C2+1 1) I use the 'R2*C2=T2' SUBST and then EVAL to make it simple s*Ue*T2 Ua= ---------------------------------------------- (sî*T2+s)*R1*C1+s*R1*C2+s*T2+1 2) Then I put the 'R1*c1=T1' on stack ready for use and SWAP the Ua=...into the first level and press [Down-Arrow] to go to the EQW 3) On the EQW I press [Right-Shift] [D-A] and then [Right-A] four times then [Up-A] 5 times to highlight the term (sî*T2+s)*R1*C1 4) Now I press [SYMB] |ALG| |SUBST| then [HIST] |ECHO| (the stack is shown and the 'R1*c1=T1' is selected) Then [L-S] [U-A] [EVAL] [ENTER] [EVAL] s*Ue*T2 Ua= ----------------------------------------- s*R1*C2+(sî*T2+s)*T1+s*T2+1 I think you know how to proceed.... 'R1*C2=T12' can be now easily SUBSTituted directly on the stack. s*Ue*T2 Ua= -------------------------------------- s*T12+(sî*T2+s)*T1+s*T2+1 ==== > Do you mean that 4 years ago there was an HP49 model with: > -The 48 case > -The 48 keyboard > -The 48 screen It's using the same screen as the HP49.. > -The 48 colors > -The 48 IR port > -The 48GX expansion slots > I sure wish I'd known about it, because I'd certainly have bought one, > rather than vowing never to buy a 49 under any circumstances! Your bad really... Some people swear never to buy the atest porsche because it doesn't look enough like the 1968 model ==== > You have forgotten a higher resolution grayscale levels screen(262*128 > for compatibility mode),much more advanced plotting abilities,etc... > I don't think that the HP49Gii will have all that unfortunately :-( > Well, a better screen would be okay too. Perhaps I worded my original wish poorly. I should have said, the things I'd like changed on future HP48. Actually, I'm easy to please. Just crank the 48 up to 500mhz and that'll be enough. Oh, speed up the UART also. Wishful thinking, J ==== > You have forgotten a higher resolution grayscale levels screen(262*128 > for compatibility mode),much more advanced plotting abilities,etc... > I don't think that the HP49Gii will have all that unfortunately :-( > Well, a better screen would be okay too. Perhaps I worded my original wish poorly. I should have said, the > things I'd like changed on future HP48. Actually, I'm easy to please. Just crank the 48 up to 500mhz and > that'll be enough. Oh, speed up the UART also. Wishful thinking, Not at all! HP is going to release a new model HP 58GX Turbo just before Xmas It is not a 500MHz, but a 5GHz machine! The 90nm Prescott or was it Tejas The only problem is: it works on AC only eg. wall outlet of 110V or 230V. (-; ==== > Do you mean that 4 years ago there was an HP49 model with: > -The 48 case > -The 48 keyboard > -The 48 screen It's using the same screen as the HP49.. -The 48 colors > -The 48 IR port > -The 48GX expansion slots I sure wish I'd known about it, because I'd certainly have bought one, > rather than vowing never to buy a 49 under any circumstances! Your bad really... Some people swear never to buy the atest porsche because > it doesn't look enough like the 1968 model Well, mine is a 1980, and it looks plenty good for me (but I will never buy the latest models, they are too round) :-) ==== What is this HP 58GX about??? You *can't* just drop a bomb like that on us and not give any extra info to sate our thirst!!! Where did you learn about it? Any info on the web? Eduardo > You have forgotten a higher resolution grayscale levels screen(262*128 > for compatibility mode),much more advanced plotting abilities,etc... > I don't think that the HP49Gii will have all that unfortunately :-( > Well, a better screen would be okay too. Perhaps I worded my original wish poorly. I should have said, the > things I'd like changed on future HP48. Actually, I'm easy to please. Just crank the 48 up to 500mhz and > that'll be enough. Oh, speed up the UART also. Wishful thinking, > Not at all! > HP is going to release a new model HP 58GX Turbo just before Xmas > It is not a 500MHz, but a 5GHz machine! The 90nm Prescott or was it Tejas > The only problem is: it works on AC only eg. wall outlet of 110V or 230V. > (-; ==== > What is this HP 58GX about??? You *can't* just drop a bomb like that on us > and not give any extra info to sate our thirst!!! Where did you learn about > it? Any info on the web? hypothetical dream calculator. Unfortunately, I think it never will be more than a dream. I don't believe the new HP has either the talent or the imagination to produce a really good calculator. It will surprise me greatly if we ever see anything worthwhile come out of HP again. -- Wayne Brown | When your tail's in a crack, you improvise fwbrown@bellsouth.net | if you're good enough. Otherwise you give | your pelt to the trapper. e^(i*pi) = -1 -- Euler | -- John Myers Myers, Silverlock ==== What is this HP 58GX about??? You *can't* just drop a bomb like that on us > and not give any extra info to sate our thirst!!! Where did you learn about > it? Any info on the web? Eduardo A desktop computer, dear Eduardo...or, as some call it: a PC You can download a HP 49G emulator to your current PC here: http://www.hpcalc.org/details.php?id=3644 SORRY about the confusion! I thought that everybody would guess right away! I'm just sick and tired with all this talk about new calculators and without.... and not give any extra info to sate our thirst!!! Where did you learn about it? Any info on the web? like you just put it, Eduardo THAT was my point !!! If you talk the talk you have to walk the walk, too. Otherwise you are a m...erh...joker? Veli-Pekka Nousiainen PS: Intel & HP had the Itanium-baby together. So it's natural to think that HP woulg get the Prescott/Tejas early. (again: for their desktop PC, which I called the HP 58GX) (it uses the new nVidia GX Graphical FX processor NV40) There is no such thing at all AND that CPU surely needs more than 100 000 mW for operation. (+ the other PC HW) How long will 3*AAA last on, say, 350W/230V ? PPS: The only problem is: it works on AC only eg. wall outlet of 110V or 230V. > (-; See the text, it's not a battery operated thing! SEE THE SMILEY !!! it was a joke! > You have forgotten a higher resolution grayscale levels screen(262*128 > for compatibility mode),much more advanced plotting abilities,etc... > I don't think that the HP49Gii will have all that unfortunately :-( > Well, a better screen would be okay too. Perhaps I worded my original wish poorly. I should have said, the > things I'd like changed on future HP48. Actually, I'm easy to please. Just crank the 48 up to 500mhz and > that'll be enough. Oh, speed up the UART also. Wishful thinking, > Not at all! > HP is going to release a new model HP 58GX Turbo just before Xmas > It is not a 500MHz, but a 5GHz machine! The 90nm Prescott or was it Tejas > The only problem is: it works on AC only eg. wall outlet of 110V or 230V. > (-; ==== I *really* wanted (or perhaps needed) to believe you. I'd rather be embarrassed than miss out on the latest gossip... I, too, want a 58GX!!! Eduardo > SEE THE SMILEY !!! it was a joke! ==== > I *really* wanted (or perhaps needed) to believe you. I'd rather be embarrassed than miss out on the latest gossip... I, too, want a 58GX!!! You mean: a PC with a 5GHz T-slot CPU that I described? (with which you can run your emulator really faaaast) ??? PS: I guess you a mean the new super-duper HP 48GX on steroids with turbo from the good-old-days of the past: http://www.magpage.com/~jakes/1998/design.pdf PPS: Thnx, jsmanrique !! > Eduardo SEE THE SMILEY !!! it was a joke! > o:&GgwJPOI(If2ww^eJK>q(*!z ==== I want a smaller case. Thinner. Shrink it lengthways by eliminating space immediately above and below the display. > All I want in a future HP48 is more memory, more speed, and perhaps > seperate buttons for arrows. That's all. Coming soon? -- Ed Straker, Harlington-Straker LLC ==== I've noticed that whenever I graph two equations in two seperate sessions it keeps the zoom from the first session. I always have to go to zoom auto. Is there any way to make the 49G automatically zoom everytime instead of hitting the zoom softkey? Thanxs in Advance, CID ==== Andrzeju - widziañem na ebay HP48G sprzedawany za 1$ na cz.90.a6ci - LCD na pewno sprawny - autor wspomina., Ëe kalkulator nie chce si.90 wñ±czy.be. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3024323356&category=20335 pzdr LN ==== X > As to the ENTER key, a double wide central ENTER key would be very welcomed Z? Where are you going to put Z on the ALPHA keyboard? You just can't use the wide [ENTER] and ALPHA cursor keys at the same time. AND when you have [ENTER] in it's original place you need both Y and Z replaced because you need that [ENTER] function in ALPHA mode... Maybe if you loose the direct [ X ] letter and shift down the [ ] key (the small ENTER is gone) you gain the Y back and can have [EEX] and [+/-] besides [ENTER] now, but hey! Where is X now ?? It's hopeless! )-: PS: If anybody says we should have yet another row of keys, my answer would be: Yes! Function keys [F7] ... [F12] THEN we could have all the alphabet, big [ENTER] and even the [ ' ] tick back plus CHARS available in ALPHA, etc... ==== > X > As to the ENTER key, a double wide central ENTER key would be very > welcomed > Where are you going to put Z on the ALPHA keyboard? > You just can't use the wide [ENTER] and ALPHA cursor keys at the same time. > AND > when you have [ENTER] in it's original place you need both Y and Z replaced > because you need that [ENTER] function in ALPHA mode... > Maybe if you loose the direct [ X ] letter and shift down the [ ] key > (the small ENTER is gone) you gain the Y back and can have > [EEX] and [+/-] besides [ENTER] now, but hey! Where is X now ?? > It's hopeless! > )-: > PS: If anybody says we should have yet another row of keys, > my answer would be: Yes! Function keys [F7] ... [F12] > THEN we could have all the alphabet, big [ENTER] > and even the [ ' ] tick back plus CHARS available in ALPHA, etc... > Why do all keys have to be on the front of the calculator? They could be on the sides or top. I can imagine having a large Enter key on the left hand side or an Escape on the right. Or how about a scroll wheel for the menus? This would bring more digits into use and perhaps speed up operation. There must be a better way to organise the keyboard. ed ==== > It's hopeless! > If anybody says we should have yet another row of keys, > my answer would be: Yes! This goes in the wrong direction. In the contrary, one should try to return to the 9-row keyboard of the HP48 with slightly bigger keys, even with a double-spaced ENTER key, and the HP49-design of the Arrow keys (without letters), with shift-hold supported. Only few people have that clumpsy fingers unable to distinguish shifthold or non-shifthold (as for prominent places. For EQW a shift is good enough (although JYA certainly invested much effort on it :-). Furthermore, why not making a direct key TRIG which sets a menu of all trigonometric functions? That would save a lot on the keyboard. As mentioned already, the righshift editor ommands BEGIN, END, COPY, CUT, PASTE have clearly to be present on a modern high-quality calc, with some additional useful tasks outside edit mode. - Wolfgang ==== > It's hopeless! > If anybody says we should have yet another row of keys, > my answer would be: Yes! This goes in the wrong direction. In the contrary, one should try to > return to the 9-row keyboard of the HP48 with slightly bigger keys, even > with a double-spaced ENTER key, and the HP49-design of the Arrow keys > (without letters), with shift-hold supported. Only few people have that > clumpsy fingers unable to distinguish shifthold or non-shifthold (as for > prominent places. For EQW a shift is good enough (although JYA certainly > invested much effort on it :-). Furthermore, why not making a direct key > TRIG which sets a menu of all trigonometric functions? That would save a > lot on the keyboard. As mentioned already, the righshift editor ommands > BEGIN, END, COPY, CUT, PASTE have clearly to be present on a modern > high-quality calc, with some additional useful tasks outside edit mode. X Sounds, good, but now, as I look at the HP 48GX keyboard, I don't seem to be able to put the letters K, P, Q, and R anywhere else as directly on the arrow keys. Hmm. rearranging...The nuber keys would have to go on the primary alpha keyboard to put all the letters back. No Wolfgang! I'm sorry, you can'.8at go back to 48 design (or would you rather have a HP 41CX design, 34C, then, 15C,) Maybe we shoulg go back to HP 28S, but have a full screen on the right hand side together with a pen-input for graphics like Sharp has. I'm confused to the edge....faaaalllliiiinnng... ==== > IMO, as far as keystroke accuracy, the HP49 with keyclick on is just > as good as the 48. The problem with the 49 keypad is that the rubber keys have too much friction with the plastic case when pressed at an angle. When pressed straight down, it's fine, but when doing fast calculations, it's difficult to press straight. If the keys had a plastic ring around the edge, or if they were completely plastic, I think they would work better. However, I still think the 48 keypad is the best. Derek ==== > TRIG which sets a menu of all trigonometric functions? That would save a > lot on the keyboard. A good idea, which I would prefer. Since you need two keystrokes for asin anyway, you wouldn't be that worse off. However, I'm sure HP won't have it. Sales would plummet if consumers looked at the product and didn't see sin or cos on any of the keys. Derek ==== > The calculator keyboard should not be the original HP48 keyboard, > but also not the chaotic HP49-keyboard. IMHO, a group of experts > should discus the keyboard question seriously. To reduce the number > of necessary keys somewhat, at least shift-hold should work. And what would be a better keyboard layout? One designed according to the needs of the majority of potential users, perhaps, rather than experts? <7fcf10a1.0305130857.4f371115@posting.google.com> <3EC2036A.4F4561EC@math.fu-berlin.de> ==== In message <3EC2036A.4F4561EC@math.fu-berlin.de>, Wolfgang Rautenberg > It's hopeless! > If anybody says we should have yet another row of keys, > my answer would be: Yes! This goes in the wrong direction. In the contrary, one should try to >return to the 9-row keyboard of the HP48 with slightly bigger keys, >even with a double-spaced ENTER key, and the HP49-design of the Arrow >keys [Snip] What about having *triangular* keys. Then you can have a function on the key itself plus 3 shifted functions around the sides, accessed through f, g and h shift keys. If you have the keys facing up and down alternately then they fill a neat rectangular row, just like the current keys. -- ==== > What about having *triangular* keys. Then you can have a function on > the key itself plus 3 shifted functions around the sides, accessed > through f, g and h shift keys. If you have the keys facing up and down > alternately then they fill a neat rectangular row, just like the > current keys. Why stop there? Make the keys square, and you can have *four* shifted functions around the sides. Hexagonal keys, anyone? Using f, g, h, i, j, and k shifts? If you were to use traditional HP RPN, I suppose you might want to skip i as a shift since it is normally used for indirect access. ==== make round keys, so you can have virtually limitless key assignments, depending on the angle you press them. Seriously, more than 2 shift levels are senseless (IMHO), or do we talk about Casios? Raymond Eric Smith schrieb im Newsbeitrag > What about having *triangular* keys. Then you can have a function on > the key itself plus 3 shifted functions around the sides, accessed > through f, g and h shift keys. If you have the keys facing up and down > alternately then they fill a neat rectangular row, just like the > current keys. Why stop there? Make the keys square, and you can have *four* shifted > functions around the sides. Hexagonal keys, anyone? Using f, g, h, i, j, and k shifts? If you > were to use traditional HP RPN, I suppose you might want to skip i as > a shift since it is normally used for indirect access. >