A158 Subject: Re: [HP49G+/HP48GII] We're l just paying beta testers! >The fact that it works in the PC is no proof whatsoever. > >2 HP49G+ in a row not working with your SD card can't be a coincidence. > The proof here is that the card used to work on s first 49g+. I > believe that he is right on ts one. Just very unlucky to have 2 in a > row. He is howver not the only one to report dead SD card reader. As > you can see from my post above, ts is my case as well > My card worked fine for a month with my old 49g+, too! It quit working a few hours after I had a new c culator spped by HP. When I got the new c culator, that didn't work either. So I got one of my dad's SD ca . IT WORKED! Thus, in my case, it's the card. I will never buy another Lexar card, if it kills me. === Subject: Re: Dear HP WE NEED WE WANT THE OLD 48GX MECHANICS KEYBOARD ON 49G+ !!!! > qu ity in short. The price, wchever! > Yes, that is what we need to keep the style, the charm, the > distinction of the 70's and 80's, the distance from the mediocre TI > c cs it used to have. HP c cs were for a certain niche market > demanding qu ity; they didn't need sometng 'popular' and that is > way they were more expensive. It is ridiculous to see HP trying to be > for the masses. That company has morphed into sometng else that builds for the masses, printer, computers etc. === Subject: HP51GX sold out [[wired news]] Newer, slimer HP sells out fast Hp has a smash t on its hands with the new HP51GX scientific c culator. The slimer cousin of the HP49G+ is virtu ly sold out after less than o weeks in stores, with nearly 100,000 snapped up. I've never seen a c culator sell like ts, says Dan G laspie, senior merchandising manager at MIT's book store. The HP51S is a phenomenon The $150 HP51GX slim c culator is the business-card-sized market extension of the HP49G+. Students have a newer view on qu ity, says Antonio Figuroa, an an yst with tech research firm Xbits and a HP51GX owner mself. When you actu ly see it and feel it, it is amazing. It is the size of a little card that fits in your srt pocket and adds little weight. it is fustrating. Every one wants to buy one, and we can't sell it. the demand is incredible .... now, what would it take for a c culator to t the news? PS: and where the heck is NKKKKK? === Subject: Re: HP51GX sold out > [[wired news]] > Newer, slimer HP sells out fast > Hp has a smash t on its hands with the new HP51GX scientific > c culator. The slimer cousin of the HP49G+ is virtu ly sold out > after less than o weeks in stores, with nearly 100,000 snapped up. > I've never seen a c culator sell like ts, says Dan G laspie, > senior merchandising manager at MIT's book store. The HP51S is a > phenomenon > The $150 HP51GX slim c culator is the business-card-sized market > extension of the HP49G+. > Students have a newer view on qu ity, says Antonio Figuroa, an > an yst with tech research firm Xbits and a HP51GX owner mself. When > you actu ly see it and feel it, it is amazing. It is the size of a > little card that fits in your srt pocket and adds little weight. > it is fustrating. Every one wants to buy one, and we can't sell it. > the demand is incredible > .... > now, what would it take for a c culator to t the news? > PS: and where the heck is NKKKKK? Yeah, I got my hands on one of these babies yesterday, and boy is it sm l! Mine's pink, but here's the best part - it has the 48's keys! (I have connections with the Russian Mafia and no, they won't sell you one). Too bad for you suckers still stuck with 49g+s. ;) === Subject: Re: HP51GX sold out X > Yeah, I got my hands on one of these babies yesterday, and boy is it > sm l! Mine's pink, but here's the best part - it has the 48's keys! > (I have connections with the Russian Mafia and no, they won't sell you > one). > Too bad for you suckers still stuck with 49g+s. ;) ! You still have that old model? Just a few hours ago they released the 51GX+ PS: My order for the 51GX II is in, I expect a speci delivery ts night === Subject: Re: HP51GX sold out what are you t king about? What is an Hp 51GX? I've never heard of it. And what do the iPod minis have to do with anytng? === Subject: Relevance of RPN (please, no holy war...) Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Is RPN still relevant (outside of c.s.hp48 and other core HP fanatics)? Ts isn't meant to incite a flame war. I've been tnking about ts, and have grown away from RPN and the HP48 I've used since my engineering undergrad days. 1) It's obvious to any programmer why RPN was conceiv and how postfix notation makes stack-based processing simpler and more efficient - for the *computer*. But as humans, we are concerned with making tngs simpler for *humans. In any case, modern computers care little about how data is entered. 2) In my graduate programming courses, we've studied the advantages of taking advantage of the user's context and existing knowledge, rather than requiring m/her to learn a new UI. Buttons, windows, icons behave (somewhat) similarly across platforms and applications these days. Developers who stick to the prevailing standa find their programs are learn master and _used_ much more than arcane applications. Ts is not (as we hardcore geeks like to imagine) a concession that users are soooo dumb. It's the way people learn tngs. Gas ped on the right, QWERTY keyboard, etc. It's not just marketing - transfer of training is a very re and important effect. 3) In my graduate human factors courses, we've seen how verb (language processing) skills are by far the most ingrained in the human mind. When people say one plus one, they liter ly tnk one plus one. You are fighting a very re and measurable part of your brain power to tnk one plus one and write one one plus. The fact that one one plus is natur to us is because we have *learned* that language. But there is notng inherent about it (unless some human language I don't know of uses postfix). The idea that RPN better reflects the way we write simple arithmetic (one over one, plus sign, line for equ s) is likely f se. Ask anyone to *read* that arithmetic to you, and you're back in the strong verb mode. (It might be different if the display actu ly showed the numbers one over the other, like arithmetic on a page, but that would take some study). 4) The last argument I know of for RPN is that it is faster to enter (quite true for experienced users) and that you can see intermediate results ( so true). Faster entry does not mean gher accuracy or ease of use. For example, we used to program using variable names like SC, but now, anyone would require you to spell out screenColor. (We can similarly debate UNIX regular expressions vs. a GUI Find box) The lesson over time was that cutting out typing makes for logic errors and vastly increased training requirements. 5) Fin ly, we have to admit that RPN as a barrier to entry to beginning users has a certain macho appe . Maybe not to _you_ , but I tnk you've probably seen ts. (Re men code in FORTRAN, we used to say). So, I have next to me a PDA that cost $120, with a 320x320 full-color could easily have similar specs (and, hopefully, a decent keyboard!). The CPU could handle whatever wacky entry method we dream up. Why still use RPN? Ts is meant as a reasoned discussion, not a geeked-out flame. My HP49 is firmly stuck in RPN mode, in case you're wondering. The question is, is there any v ue added to making new users learn RPN, when they could arguably be more productive writing equations just as they do on paper (my arguments above)? I'm especi ly curious if anyone knows of actu studies, and not just anectdot evidence (i.e. RPN is faster for me, so shut up). === Subject: Re: Relevance of RPN (please, no holy war...) I find your questions extremely relevant and have thought about them myself a number of times. Here's an excerpt of a posting I made a couple of years ago wch is perfectly relevant to the issues you raise: Fin ly, 'RPN has many advantages over AOS' needs some heavy qu ification. Undoubtely, 4-level stack RPN was a marvel when compared to early TI c culators, such as the SR-52, TI-58 or TI-59, where you felt cramped and absolutely lost as to just where you are in the middle of a many-parenthesis expression. I tnk most RPN fans ways have in mind those kind of c culators when they tnk ' gebraic'. But next to more advanced pocket computers and c culators of the time, such as the many worthwle SHARPs, classic 4-level RPN just doesn't hold a candle. Not when you can type and see your full gebraic equation l at once on the display, written on the display as it is in the book, with named variables if necessary, and can go forth and back inserting, deleting or changing anytng before you even press ENTER. Then after the result has been computed you can rec l the whole expression to the display again, to edit or recompute with different v ues. And if you tnk it merits being considered a program, just stick a line number in front of it, press ENTER, and there you are. Only sheer stubbornness can claim than 4-level RPN is better than such a typic , modern gebraic system. And of course, if you take on someone having such a SHARP and try to proselitize with your 4-level RPN c culator, he or she will merely tnk you're pathetic at best, and nuts at worse. Of course, SHARP is just an example, the same can be argued for the C C mode of the 71B, wch has the added advantage of showing intermediate results and is capable of backstepping a c culation one step at a time (but has the serious disadvantages of a 21-character display and no multicharacter names for variables). RPL macnes have some of those features as well, but RPL programs and expressions are ways much more cryptic and difficult to create and understand than the equiv ent gebraic expression, speci ly if you must reorder terms and/or use stack operations. If anytng goes wrong, it will take much longer and more effort to locate the fault than in the purely gebraic version. No wonder masses tend to stay apart from such unnecessary complications. By the way, don't take ts as any sort of 'attack' on RPN. I was doing and proselitizing RPN before some of you were even born, and I like it very much. But that doesn't blind me as to its shortcomings and other system's advantages, to the point of tnking everyone else is wrong and marketing is to blame. People are never fool, assuming that they are just shows who the re fool is, and if a product succeeds and flourishes against the competence, you can bet there's sometng to it apart from marketing hype. Best . > Is RPN still relevant (outside of c.s.hp48 and other core HP fanatics)? > Ts isn't meant to incite a flame war. I've been tnking about ts, > and have grown away from RPN and the HP48 I've used since my > engineering undergrad days. > 1) It's obvious to any programmer why RPN was conceiv and how > postfix notation makes stack-based processing simpler and more > efficient - for the *computer*. But as humans, we are concerned with > making tngs simpler for *humans. In any case, modern computers care > little about how data is entered. > 2) In my graduate programming courses, we've studied the advantages of > taking advantage of the user's context and existing knowledge, rather > than requiring m/her to learn a new UI. Buttons, windows, icons > behave (somewhat) similarly across platforms and applications these > days. Developers who stick to the prevailing standa find their > programs are learn master and _used_ much more than arcane > applications. Ts is not (as we hardcore geeks like to imagine) a > concession that users are soooo dumb. It's the way people learn > tngs. Gas ped on the right, QWERTY keyboard, etc. It's not just > marketing - transfer of training is a very re and important effect. > 3) In my graduate human factors courses, we've seen how verb > (language processing) skills are by far the most ingrained in the human > mind. When people say one plus one, they liter ly tnk one plus > one. You are fighting a very re and measurable part of your brain > power to tnk one plus one and write one one plus. The fact that > one one plus is natur to us is because we have *learned* that > language. But there is notng inherent about it (unless some human > language I don't know of uses postfix). The idea that RPN better > reflects the way we write simple arithmetic (one over one, plus sign, > line for equ s) is likely f se. Ask anyone to *read* that arithmetic > to you, and you're back in the strong verb mode. (It might be > different if the display actu ly showed the numbers one over the > other, like arithmetic on a page, but that would take some study). > 4) The last argument I know of for RPN is that it is faster to enter > (quite true for experienced users) and that you can see intermediate > results ( so true). Faster entry does not mean gher accuracy or ease > of use. For example, we used to program using variable names like SC, > but now, anyone would require you to spell out screenColor. (We can > similarly debate UNIX regular expressions vs. a GUI Find box) The > lesson over time was that cutting out typing makes for logic errors > and vastly increased training requirements. > 5) Fin ly, we have to admit that RPN as a barrier to entry to > beginning users has a certain macho appe . Maybe not to _you_ , but > I tnk you've probably seen ts. (Re men code in FORTRAN, we used > to say). > So, I have next to me a PDA that cost $120, with a 320x320 full-color > could easily have similar specs (and, hopefully, a decent keyboard!). > The CPU could handle whatever wacky entry method we dream up. Why still > use RPN? > Ts is meant as a reasoned discussion, not a geeked-out flame. My HP49 > is firmly stuck in RPN mode, in case you're wondering. The question is, > is there any v ue added to making new users learn RPN, when they could > arguably be more productive writing equations just as they do on paper > (my arguments above)? I'm especi ly curious if anyone knows of actu > studies, and not just anectdot evidence (i.e. RPN is faster for me, > so shut up). === Subject: Re: Relevance of RPN (please, no holy war...) X > the C C mode of the 71B, wch > has the added advantage of showing intermediate results and is capable of > backstepping a c culation one step at a time X Ahhh! If only could we have that entry mode in the new hp 49g+ by pressing [RightSft]&hold ENTRY === Subject: Re: Relevance of RPN (please, no holy war...) <> I tnk that nowadays it's mainly for people who are ready used to RPN and see no reason to use gebraic notation instead. For example, the HP49G(+) defaults to gebraic mode by default. Marketing to students and profession s whose friends and co-workers use TI c culators is part of the reason, but I don't tnk it's the only reason. < At least on TI c culators, Enter represents OK, and di og box buttons state ts. === Subject: Re: Relevance of RPN (please, no holy war...) > < holy crap, wch key represents the OK button!?> > At least on TI c culators, Enter represents OK, and di og box > buttons state ts. Believe me, I know that :) I used a TI-89 for a year before I got my 49g+. But the point I was making was that you have to read from the screen and then take your eyes l the way down the damn c culator to t the right key. On the HP, the label and button (in forms and soft menus) are RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER! === Subject: Re: Relevance of RPN (please, no holy war...) === > Is RPN still relevant (outside of c.s.hp48 and other core HP fanatics)? Your message suggests that you see RPN/L as a concept that was once defined/creat and can't evolve... > 1) It's obvious to any programmer why RPN was conceiv and how > postfix notation makes stack-based processing simpler and more > efficient - for the *computer*. But as humans, we are concerned with > making tngs simpler for *humans. In any case, modern computers care > little about how data is entered. I agree that parsing and preprocessing is not an issue today, and that the system should focus on the user. We have o main subjects : - RPN (x y +) - RPL, the associated programming language Ts combination was interesting because it lowed - a kind of key-press programming. - a simple interface with a stack. The first point is not as relevant as it was earlier, but maybe still lows faster programming (for sm l progs at least). The second one is much more important because it is a very natur way of passing/returning v ues. The program is seen as a stack modifier (wch has access to variables) and the syntax avoid the explicit use of push function. The stack is a nice programming tool. If you consider it as the centre of your system, RPN is the obvious way yo go. But you can do otherwise. > 2) In my graduate programming courses, we've studied the advantages of > taking advantage of the user's context and existing knowledge, rather > than requiring m/her to learn a new UI. Buttons, windows, icons > behave (somewhat) similarly across platforms and applications these > days. Developers who stick to the prevailing standa find their > programs are learn master and _used_ much more than arcane > applications. Ts is not (as we hardcore geeks like to imagine) a > concession that users are soooo dumb. It's the way people learn > tngs. Gas ped on the right, QWERTY keyboard, etc. It's not just > marketing - transfer of training is a very re and important effect. I agree with you, but you should note that you sometimes need to add a new tool to an existing interface. A c c is not a computer and an interface is not suitable for everytng. The HP48 num solver has an excellent interface, far superior (in my view) to the others I have seen in c culators (including HP48/9G grapc interface). Simple, intuitive, visu . The HP48 units menus are excellent too. The windows-GUI (with entry fields...) are good for computer, but with a c c, you can improve it, taking advantage of the dedicated keys, like menu-keys (beyond the OK/CANCEL ternative...). > 3) In my graduate human factors courses, we've seen how verb > (language processing) skills are by far the most ingrained in the human > mind. When people say one plus one, they liter ly tnk one plus > one. You are fighting a very re and measurable part of your brain > power to tnk one plus one and write one one plus. The fact that > one one plus is natur to us is because we have *learned* that > language. But there is notng inherent about it (unless some human > language I don't know of uses postfix). I tnk there IS sometng inherent about it. It is probably more visu that verb : is ts sequence an RPN sequence ? c e * a b + b d - 2 + * sqrt + Even if you are used to it, you'll have to read it, keeping it mind its current height (the height of the stack), wch is not natur . c*e+sqrt((a+b)*(b-d+2)) But ts form will seem perfectly correct, at first sight, because you don't have anytng to compute. It is more visu . Ts emphasize the fact that RPN is an input method, but not a good visu representation (quite obvious...). > The idea that RPN better > reflects the way we write simple arithmetic (one over one, plus sign, > line for equ s) is likely f se. Ask anyone to *read* that arithmetic > to you, and you're back in the strong verb mode. (It might be > different if the display actu ly showed the numbers one over the > other, like arithmetic on a page, but that would take some study). [The idea that RPN is better... for what ?] visu (*read*), as I said, not verb ... But I completely agree : RPN is not suited for visu representation. > 4) The last argument I know of for RPN is that it is faster to enter > (quite true for experienced users) and that you can see intermediate > results ( so true). Faster entry does not mean gher accuracy or ease > of use. For example, we used to program using variable names like SC, > but now, anyone would require you to spell out screenColor. I would say that a faster entry means that the entry is easier. You mix the o different questions, entry and programming. > (We can > similarly debate UNIX regular expressions vs. a GUI Find box) The > lesson over time was that cutting out typing makes for logic errors > and vastly increased training requirements. Your example is a good one: regular expressions are not an interface, it is a tool, to be used inside an interface (just as a stack could be). Obviously, having a Find box rather than an entry line input IS better for the user, who can access options through checkboxes, AND choose to use (some kind of) reg exp in s query if he needs to: for example, if you define * to be any char, people would easily adopt it, because it is intuitive. (of course, the user has to read a manu , like the online help, to learn that such * is available, but I don't tnk it is a problem) But comparing the HP48 interface with command line tools is strange: it is a completely different kind of interface. One of the benefits of RPN is that it lows those excellent (and simple) interfaces like the solver menu and the units menu, where you don't type a single word. > 5) Fin ly, we have to admit that RPN as a barrier to entry to > beginning users has a certain macho appe . Maybe not to _you_ , but > I tnk you've probably seen ts. (Re men code in FORTRAN, we used > to say). The problem is not the fact that some barrier to entry could have a certain macho appe , but the fact that ts barrier to entry exists. Such barrier has to be in proportion of the benefits of the new system (the fact that you don't drive a car the same way you drive your bike IS a barrier to entry...). > So, I have next to me a PDA that cost $120, with a 320x320 full-color > could easily have similar specs (and, hopefully, a decent keyboard!). > The CPU could handle whatever wacky entry method we dream up. Why still > use RPN? Having a stack nicely interfaced seems very good, for passing v ues, returning results, and gorithmic use (I see those three points as good arguments in favour of RPN, but you don't mention them). For that purpose, RPN is useful. Besides that, you forget that RPN lows those menu interfaces, wch are very convenient. With a good manu , you will be able to show the benefits of it easily. (I don't consider reading a manu to be a too gh barrier to entry, as far as the c c interface is intuitive, so that you don't have to read it three times) === Subject: Re: Relevance of RPN (please, no holy war...) > Is RPN still relevant (outside of c.s.hp48 and other core HP fanatics)? > 1) It's obvious to any programmer why RPN was conceiv and how > postfix notation makes stack-based processing simpler and more > efficient - for the *computer*. But as humans, we are concerned with > making tngs simpler for *humans. In any case, modern computers care > little about how data is entered. [skipping ahead to 3)] > The fact that one one plus is natur to us is because we have > *learned* that language. But there is notng inherent about it > (unless some human language I don't know of uses postfix). The idea > that RPN better reflects the way we write simple arithmetic (one > over one, plus sign, line for equ s) is likely f se. Ask anyone to > *read* that arithmetic to you, and you're back in the strong verb > mode. I tnk one of the obvious problems is that wle we l can instantly convert gebraics to RPN when tnking or reading them off paper, I know of nobody who can understand complex RPN at a glance. Consider I 1 X I 2 ^ sigma 2 X 3 ^ * 3 X 2 ^ * + x + 6 / = wch is the RPN equiv ent of X - 3 2 2 2 X + 3 X + X / I = - - 6 I=1 Back in grammar school (or whatever you go to before University, in Switzerland we c l it Gymnasium) most students, as far as I know the whole school but o, used TI c culators. In the first three years they recently switched to XXXs, wch have an gebraic entry line with delayed ev uation and story, much like the better ones; in the second three years they used 92+s (changed to Voyage 200 when it came out). The remaining o are me and a friend who chose 49Gs; we both completed our six years there last summer, so the whole school is TI now. Wle there were of course a few who made good use of their 92+, a good part of my class fought an etern battle against it. Many you stupid ing c culator shouts were due to a wrong parenthesis somewhere in a long input line that led to an error message or, worse, wrong results. Others failed to grasp the concept of operator precedence in the context of gebraic entry, usu ly confusing the division operator and written fractions. And frankly, would you like to keep track of three or more open parentheses when your re concern is getting the maths right? So I convinced the girl whom I taught private lessons, and who never quite got the parentheses right, to try RPN. She never got any better in it than in gebraic entry, but entering anytng now so required some ment effort. For me the conclusions are: 1. RPN isn't any easier to tnk in than gebraic. 2. Forget about l the geeks out there. They will find the most powerful sword to wield by themselves, and they can understand and use nearly any programming language. Give the rest an easy-to-use c culator, even if it is laughed at by the geeks. IMO what a beginner's c culator needs is an improved gebraic entry. I tnk it would ready help a lot if it used a colour display and showed nested parentheses in different colours. EQW is another option that needs to be explor wch could work very well if the teacher used it exclusively mself (in explanations etc.). Or, best of l, let people draw/write gebraic in paper notation on the display. > I'm especi ly curious if anyone knows of actu studies, and not > just anectdot evidence (i.e. RPN is faster for me, so shut up). I fail the first condition, but at least I can provide anectdot evidence that is not restricted to myself If you want to reply by mail, substitute my first and last name for 'foo' and 'bar', respectively. === Subject: Re: Relevance of RPN (please, no holy war...) X > good part of my class fought an etern battle against it. Many you > stupid ing c culator shouts were due to a wrong parenthesis > somewhere in a long input line that led to an error message or, worse, > wrong results. Others failed to grasp the concept of operator > precedence in the context of algebraic entry, usu ly confusing the > division operator and written fractions. And frankly, would you like > to keep track of three or more open parentheses when your re concern > is getting the maths right? Keep on remainding me why I got rid of the TI-89 HW1 of mine === Subject: Re: Relevance of RPN (please, no holy war...) > For me the conclusions are: > 1. RPN isn't any easier to tnk in than gebraic. I agree with you. > IMO what a beginner's c culator needs is an improved gebraic > entry. Probably. I explained in another post the benefits I found in RPN (mainly the stack as interface with programs, and lowing some nice menu interfaces), but I wouldn't qu ify the HP48 a beginner's c culator. Since the question was: is RPN still relevant ? I assumed it was not focused on ghschool students. I was t king about an engineer/college student's c culator. > I tnk it would ready help a lot if it used a colour display > and showed nested parentheses in different colours. It would be nice. > EQW is another > option that needs to be explor wch could work very well if the > teacher used it exclusively mself (in explanations etc.). I disagree on that. If you need the teacher to use exactly the same tool as you are, it means that the tool is not the right one. I mean that the go of EQW is that if a student see a formula in textbook notation, he will be able to enter it by mself. (of course, he will have to read the manu , but for EQW, an extensive description, with detailed examples and a complete list of functions was written on a dozen A5 pages, with very few lines of text per page.) === Subject: Re: Relevance of RPN (please, no holy war...) A couple quick thoughts: >Is RPN still relevant (outside of c.s.hp48 and other core HP fanatics)? Relevant or popular? Relevant to what? There are many obvious concepts wch are not relevant in other contexts. The earth turns out to be quite a bit less flat than once was popular, Newtonian physics have no resembelance to quantum physics, etc. The point is not that RPN is a better method for num entry, but rather that I believe it may be relevant in other areas than c culators. For example, learning the concepts of RPN on a c culator helped me greatly in learning how to make estimates and to improve my ment c culating speed over l. >You are fighting a very re and measurable part of your brain >power to tnk one plus one and write one one plus. Perhaps ts explains why the German's are so much better at math, don't they use post-fix verbs :) Math is a language, and there are different ways of expressing the same ideas, just as there are different languages. === Subject: Re: Relevance of RPN (please, no holy war...) Message-Id: X-Ref: news.actcom.co.il ~XNS:00000057 # that I believe it may be relevant in other areas than c culators. For example, # learning the concepts of RPN on a c culator helped me greatly in learning how # to make estimates and to improve my ment c culating speed over l. How? === Subject: Re: Relevance of RPN (please, no holy war...) > Is RPN still relevant (outside of c.s.hp48 and other core HP fanatics)? > Ts isn't meant to incite a flame war. I've been tnking about ts, > and have grown away from RPN and the HP48 I've used since my > engineering undergrad days. > 1) It's obvious to any programmer why RPN was conceiv and how > postfix notation makes stack-based processing simpler and more > efficient - for the *computer*. But as humans, we are concerned with > making tngs simpler for *humans. In any case, modern computers care > little about how data is entered. > 2) In my graduate programming courses, we've studied the advantages of > taking advantage of the user's context and existing knowledge, rather > than requiring m/her to learn a new UI. Buttons, windows, icons > behave (somewhat) similarly across platforms and applications these > days. Developers who stick to the prevailing standa find their > programs are learn master and _used_ much more than arcane > applications. Ts is not (as we hardcore geeks like to imagine) a > concession that users are soooo dumb. It's the way people learn > tngs. Gas ped on the right, QWERTY keyboard, etc. It's not just > marketing - transfer of training is a very re and important effect. Yes, a UI that someone ready knows is quite a bit easier to learn. The TI c culators seem to implement a menu/window interface, where as the HP's use CHOOSE boxes and soft-menus. I like using soft menus for forms, as it's a whole lot easier than holy crap, wch key represents the OK button!? But then again, why are there o SOLVE's here!? You *do* have to know the menu to use it rapidly. > 3) In my graduate human factors courses, we've seen how verb > (language processing) skills are by far the most ingrained in the human > mind. When people say one plus one, they liter ly tnk one plus > one. You are fighting a very re and measurable part of your brain > power to tnk one plus one and write one one plus. The fact that > one one plus is natur to us is because we have *learned* that > language. But there is notng inherent about it (unless some human > language I don't know of uses postfix). The idea that RPN better > reflects the way we write simple arithmetic (one over one, plus sign, > line for equ s) is likely f se. Ask anyone to *read* that arithmetic > to you, and you're back in the strong verb mode. (It might be > different if the display actu ly showed the numbers one over the > other, like arithmetic on a page, but that would take some study). Actu ly, Japanese uses sort-of postfix notation in speaking: Watas-wa Macyu desu. I-[subject] Matthew am. > 4) The last argument I know of for RPN is that it is faster to enter > (quite true for experienced users) and that you can see intermediate > results ( so true). Faster entry does not mean gher accuracy or ease > of use. For example, we used to program using variable names like SC, > but now, anyone would require you to spell out screenColor. (We can > similarly debate UNIX regular expressions vs. a GUI Find box) The > lesson over time was that cutting out typing makes for logic errors > and vastly increased training requirements. > 5) Fin ly, we have to admit that RPN as a barrier to entry to > beginning users has a certain macho appe . Maybe not to _you_ , but > I tnk you've probably seen ts. (Re men code in FORTRAN, we used > to say). > So, I have next to me a PDA that cost $120, with a 320x320 full-color > could easily have similar specs (and, hopefully, a decent keyboard!). > The CPU could handle whatever wacky entry method we dream up. Why still > use RPN? Why not? It's not like it's forced upon new users very hard; the tngs default to G (ick) mode. HP would lose over h f the their cusers (that they didn't ready lose) if they dropped RPN completely. > Ts is meant as a reasoned discussion, not a geeked-out flame. My HP49 > is firmly stuck in RPN mode, in case you're wondering. The question is, > is there any v ue added to making new users learn RPN, when they could > arguably be more productive writing equations just as they do on paper > (my arguments above)? I'm especi ly curious if anyone knows of actu > studies, and not just anectdot evidence (i.e. RPN is faster for me, > so shut up). I learned RPN re ly quickly. I *wanted* to learn, though; that makes a difference. I found a good RPN shell for my TI-89 and punched away. Even if RPN isn't that useful (wch, I admit, it's not, though I use it l the time), the EQuation Writer is. === Subject: Re: Relevance of RPN (please, no holy war...) X > Actu ly, Japanese uses sort-of postfix notation in speaking: > Watas-wa Macyu desu. > I-[subject] Matthew am. X So does Yoda So did the Romans or anyone speaking Latin. Easy it is... === Subject: Re: HP49G LGPL CAS release > on rom build from HP49G LGPL CAS release write version and say > Version HP49-B > Revision #1.20-7 > Copyright HP2002 > and write ver and say > 4.20010326 > most recent ROM, but old CAS ?? Yes. Unfortunately, not only the HP49G ROM provided with the Erable source code is a non-working one ( l ports routine are buggy) ; it's unfortunately enfriging copyright laws as it releases a HP-private version of the ROM. Then secondly, the CAS source code is not the last one. Hopefully, both problems will be corrected one day === Subject: Re: HP49G LGPL CAS release X > Yes. > Unfortunately, not only the HP49G ROM provided with the Erable source > code is a non-working one ( l ports routine are buggy) ; it's > unfortunately enfriging copyright laws as it releases a HP-private > version of the ROM. X Private? therefore the whole ROM goes GPL That never happened? Did HP buy yu out from free source You punishement should be life time mandatory use of MS Windows only !!!! === Subject: Re: HP49G LGPL CAS release > > The trouble is that rplcomp file is at tools directory. It is an > MS-DOS executable file, and the make runs only in Linux. Did you even try before posting? You can perfectly run Win32 application from cygwin. So even the Windows HPTOOLS will run under cygwin. That's how I'm using it. You could so recompile the hptools under cygwin, but they then run much more slowly. === Subject: Help in ML IĞm making a translator English => Portugues for the 49g+. I want to write a program in ML (needs to be in ML, because the list is huge and the program has to be fast)that takes a list of wo in English {armattackassign} and some string that the user typed ar and them create other list with the wo that begin with the typed string ar. === Subject: Re: Samson Cables told the truth as they knew it I hope those clearance ones aren't older models because I just bought one. I guess I'll just wait and see. -Brandon === Subject: Re: Samson Cables told the truth as they knew it >I hope those clearance ones aren't older models because I just bought >one. I guess I'll just wait and see. >-Brandon that it is the one with the better keyboard, Harold A. Climer Dept,Of Physics,Geology & Astronomy U.T.Chattanooga Room 318 Grote H l 615 McC lie Ave Chattanooga TN 37403 423-425-4546 === Subject: Re: Samson Cables told the truth as they knew it > Hmmm......Samson is having a 'clearance' on the 49G+ units at $125 each. > Looks like they're dumping the old inventory. I spotted them selling the > newer ones on eBay for about $135. >What is their E-bay User ID? Here is a link to their eBay auction: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3080733362&category=11712 Subject: Re: My new hp49g+ usb problem. Help! === Ts has happened to me in the past until I discovered a t. It seems to help if I push the APPS button, then select the 2. I/O functions menu option. Then select 5. Transfer. At that point, setup the transfer as follows: Port: Wire Type: Kermit Fmt: Bin Xlat: Newl Chk: 3 Check the OvrW option Then push the NXT button and select OK. Now, with the USB cable connected to the c culator, push and release the red right sft key, then push the cursor right arrow key located in the upper right part of the keyboard. Your display should now read: Xmodem Server Waiting for command At ts point, you should be able to electric ly link the PC with the c culator using the Conn4x connectivity kit sofare. If ts doesn't work, you may have a defective c culator. My first HP49G+ wouldn't t k to the computer or the SD card, so I just bought another one. It has a later model seri number wch may have helped. The new one works beautifully - I love it. Good luck! JB > guys: > I bought my brand new hp49g+ last week, the rom version is 3.19, > seri : CN40304873. I tried it with a SD card (Kingmax 128MB), it > works well. But when I used the usb to communicate with my PC, it > ways display the message Error(The connectivity kit is unable to > open communications to: HPx9G+). > I have done the following tngs: > 1) I tried to use Connect using drop menu with auto, HPx9G+. => > Failed > 2) program and device driver came with the package => failed > 3) download program and device driver from HP offici home page => > failed > 4) I tried different windows systems and PCs at Home and my office, > including: XP Home, XP pro, ME, 98SE, => l failed to communicate > with my HP49g+. > 5) l PC's USB can communicate well with other devices like SD card > reader etc. > 6) Not done yet : upgrade the ROM, or c l HP support > Is it the time to upgrade the ROM from HP offici site? Or just c l > the HP support. Is the USB on the HP49G+ defective ? > Thanks for your attention! > K. Kong === Subject: Re: 1 gb SD Card on ebay Wow... impressive. A little big for a c culator, though. :-D That'd fit O copies of l of www.hpc c.org (including images). -J > For those interest there's a 1 gb SD card for auction on eBay. I'm not > connected with the seller in any way, just relaying the info that the 1 gb > card is fin ly here! > http://tinyurl.com/2n3ca === Subject: Re: ARM code extraction utility > l, >I have written a sm l Java program that should extract the opcodes out >of a file generated by the ARM SDT (linked to on my webpage). You need >java and the ARM SDT inst led to run it. Usage: There is no need to use any proprietary or speci ized sofare to do ts - the standard *nix/GNU tools work just fine. First, you'll need the arm-elf build of the GNU binutils inst led. First download the latest version from http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/binutils/. Next, get into a unix shell. If you're under windows, you'll first need to inst l Cygwin before proceeding to ts step. (http://www.cygwin.com/) Now, follow the instructions here : http://www. eph1.co.uk/armlinux/docs/toolchain/toolchHOWTO/t1.html , and build the toolchain to the target arm-elf . It only takes three commands and runs flawlessly under Cygwin. To assemble an ARM assembly language source file and produce output useable by the HPTOOLS, do ts : arm-elf-as -mcpu=arm920t -o objectfile sourcefile arm-elf-objcopy -O binary objectfile objectfile.raw od -v -An -tx1 -w40 objectfile.raw | sed s/ //g;s/^/tNIBHEXt/ > hpinclude.hex hpinclude.hex, or whatever you choose to name the fin output, is now suitable for inclusion via the INCLUDE directive into an SASM source file. To do disassembly of raw ARM macne code, use : arm-elf-objdump -b binary -d -m armv5t prefix-addresses disassemble-zeroes inputfile.raw > disassembly As you can see, it's very simple. - before replying. === Subject: Re: ARM code extraction utility > First, you'll need the arm-elf build of the GNU binutils inst led. > First download the latest version from > http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/binutils/. Next, get into a unix shell. If > you're under windows, you'll first need to inst l Cygwin before > proceeding to ts step. > (http://www.cygwin.com/) Now, follow the instructions here : > http://www. eph1.co.uk/armlinux/docs/toolchain/toolchHOWTO/t1.html , > and build the toolchain to the target arm-elf . It only takes three > commands and runs flawlessly under Cygwin. > To assemble an ARM assembly language source file and produce output > useable by the HPTOOLS, do ts : > arm-elf-as -mcpu=arm920t -o objectfile sourcefile > arm-elf-objcopy -O binary objectfile objectfile.raw > od -v -An -tx1 -w40 objectfile.raw | sed s/ //g;s/^/tNIBHEXt/ > hpinclude.hex > hpinclude.hex, or whatever you choose to name the fin output, is > now suitable for inclusion via the INCLUDE directive into an SASM > source file. > To do disassembly of raw ARM macne code, use : > arm-elf-objdump -b binary -d -m armv5t prefix-addresses > disassemble-zeroes inputfile.raw > disassembly > As you can see, it's very simple. > - > Good work, Jonathan, but I doubt objcopy works if you've got other symbols. I *do*, however, have a fix for ts: use the arm-aout target. Then, to compile code, you need to: arm-aout-as -o arm-aout-ld oformat binary -o Where: is the source file (cusarily .S), is the object file (cusarily .o), and is the binary file (cusarily no extension [*nix] or .exe [Windows]) Since that uses ld, the linker, it *should* work with multiple symbols. so, you can still use od, like Mr. Busby said. so, you can decompile just as easily with the aout target: arm-aout-objdump -d -b binary -EL prefix-addresses input_file > disassembly I am keeping an updated copy of a message I posted to ts newsgroup about ARM9 programming with binutils at: http://paxl.org:2080/~mokomull/binutils-arm9.html (Mr. Xavier LaRue, please note that ts is on *your* server. I am so very sorry if it gets a slashdot effect.) === Subject: Re: I'm a beginner...why SysRPL ? === [...] > 2. Norm y sysRPL programs are shorter (e.g. DROP SWAP > becomes DROPSWAP) and about 10 % faster than a good > usrRPL-Program. usrRPL is ghly redundat in argument checking, > wch costs running time. Is 10% gain i na speed worth fiddling with SysRPL? Do you recommend to first write program in UserRPL and then rewrite in SysRPL? , === Subject: Re: I'm a beginner...why SysRPL ? charset=iso-8859-1 < @mail.inet.hr> schrieb > Is 10% gain i na speed worth fiddling with SysRPL? No. > Do you recommend to first write program in UserRPL and then rewrite in > SysRPL? For learning sysRPL it is maybe helpfull, but in gener I would say no. The main pro for sysRPL is function ity. ..Heiko === Subject: [OT] Attention someone who reads ts group and lives near Z.9frich Switzerland... ...your computer is spamming me with the W32.Netsky.D@mm worm. I've received o e-mails from similar IP's over the past 2 days : 183.58.77.83.cust.bluewin.ch ( 83.77.58.183 ) 40.57.76.83.cust.bluewin.ch ( 83.76.57.40 ) Both sources report their location as : Z.9frich (47.367N, 8.550E) According to a portscan, you have open SMTP ( 25 ) and POP3 ( 110 ) ports on your system, wch probably means that you're still infected and being used as a spam zombie. Thanks for inserting my e-mail into yet another spam list. Get the remov instructions from here : http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.netsky.d@mm.html or disconnect your computer. Or, I can contact your ISP and have them do it for you. :) - before replying. === Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_[OT]_Attention_someone_who_reads_ts_group?= =?iso-8859-1?q?_and_lives_near_Z=FCrich_Switzerland...?= > Both sources report their location as : > Z.9frich (47.367N, 8.550E) Note that Switzerland is *sm l*. You don't have to live anywhere near Zurich in Swiss terms to get one of these IPs! If you want to reply by mail, substitute my first and last name for 'foo' and 'bar', respectively. === Subject: Re: [HP49g+] SysRpl problem I've tried your programme but my Hp still make an infinite loop :( Any way I want to try with the command GETTOUCH BEGIN GETTOUCH IT DROP BINT1 EQU UNTIL but Don't test ts programme: I get a RESET :( Well I don't know what to do! What's about you, l the Hp49g+ users ? Thanks for your help === Subject: Re: [HP49g+] SysRpl problem > I've tried your programme but my Hp still make an infinite loop :( Wch one? The one that displays BARF! is supposed to go into an endless loop, but only after displaying the message, thus proving the point. > BEGIN > GETTOUCH > IT DROP > BINT1 > EQU > UNTIL IT DROP effectively destroys any output from GETTOUCH, since in the #key T case you DROP #key, and in the F case notng remains. Try ts instead: :: BEGIN GETTOUCH ITE #1= F SE UNTIL ; The ITE has o cases to de with (stack contents after the ITE): - A key was press on the stack there's #key. So we need to test if it was the right key. - No key was press on the stack there's notng. Need to push a F SE to prevent the loop from exiting Thomas If you want to reply by mail, substitute my first and last name for 'foo' and 'bar', respectively. === Subject: Re: [HP49g+] SysRpl problem Well I understand better now. I thought that the command GETTOUCH return F SE if no key had been pressed ans return TRUE (on the level 1) and #key (on the level 2) Thats why I have put the 'DROP'. Anyway you're code works perfectly. Now I'm going to try to make a CASE structure like that: If I presse [->] then move a grob etc.... Well very much and I hope we'll t k about programmation in the futur! === Subject: Re: A very little bug in old HP49 1.20-7 First of l you have to compile it with the CAS sources wch you can find at hpc c.org (CAS release) http://www.hpc c.org/hp49/math/symbolic/casrelease.zip When you got it, if haven't got a linux system you'll need to inst l Cygwin ( http://www.cygwin.com ), in order to compiled it (make command) Bye P.D: I've seen that the CAS version in 1.20.7 is older than the one in the 1.19.6 version :( > ... > first of l, where do you get the ROM 1.20-7 from? > The ROM I am using is 1.19-6 and I have nearly no problems > on the emulator or re HP49G. > ..Heiko === Subject: Re: HP 33s questions hmmm... Apparently a few hp 33s are ready out there, but they've got a bug in the OS. That may explain why it is taking so long to put them out in the market. Check ts out: http://www.hpmuseum.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/hpmuseum/forum.cgi?read=53074 === Subject: Re: HP 33s questions > hmmm... Apparently a few hp 33s are ready out there, but they've got > a bug in the OS. It doesn't seem to be a very significant one, though. bkr === Subject: [HP49G+] finding seri port + adding wireless transmitter i want to try to add a wireless tx/rx to my hp49g+ in order to connect 2 HP c culators wireless. To do so i have to have a seri port where i can connect the (seri <->wireless)-modul to.. Ok problem is the HP49g+ has no seri port...(or lets they it has no on the outside) Ok i had o ideas to get seri from the 49g+ 1. use the seri port where the IR-diodes are connected ( is ts possible or isen't ts a re seri port and only a simple output of the ARM???) 2. I looked at the samsung arm9-doc and saw that the processor has native USB support... but when i plug the hp49g+ to my linux box it gets recognized as usb-to-seri converter. Perhaps HP hasen't used the re USB port from the arm9 and simply used a seri port and connected it to the USB_SERI _CONVERTER.... so we perhaps could solder our cable to ts seri port... ( but question is why should HP do ts and not insted use re USB_PORT of arm9.. perhaps backward compatibility to HP49??? )) Perhaps someone could open s HP49g+ and look if near the usb connector is a usb-to-seri -converter-ic. If there is one we have found our seri port..... What do you tnk?? === Subject: Re: Web Navigator for HP49G and hp49g+ : new version online Great job :) Yoann Desir a .8ecrit dans le message de > The latest version (0.08 and 0.08+) of my web navigator for HP49G and > hp49g+ is available at : > http://www.hp-sources.com/navigator/english.asp > The 49g+ version features full-screen displaying, thanks to the > SETLNED instruction (just like in the Telescope game of Jean-Marc > Arsan), so you'll see eleven lines of text (7 pixel lines per > character line since I use a pixel line to underline the links). > As usu , some minor bugs have been fixed. > If you find new ones, feel free to make me aware. > If you use, try or like ts program, please tell me too. > Best , > Yoann. === Subject: Questions about 48GX operation I am taking a class about wireless communication ts semester and want to put an equation into the HP48GX I got last year for another neorking class. In that class the teacher beamed the equations through IR and they got stored on it. I can enter the equations into the c culator but I have no idea how to store it so I can c l it up during an exam. The equation is pretty basic for sign energy per noise bit sometng like ts: Eb/No = S dBW - 10 log R -10 log k - 10 log T that is in decibel notation. There is so Eb/No = S/R / No = S / kTR There are a few other equations wch would be nice to have stored but I don't know how to store them into memory once they are entered. so, should I just give the ratio Eb/No a name or leave it as is? Its hard to say since I haven't seen the exam yet and don't know wch parts of the equations will be known. Thanks in advance, Joshua === Subject: conect 49g and 49g+? Can someone explain me how to make a cable to connect a HP 49 g+ and a 49g. === Subject: Re: HP 49G+ Questions X > I know that the HP 48GX and 48SX had an > equation library in it X GX did/does, but for the 48SX you need a ROM card for that. You have been ready answered about the extern library for the 49g+ in another post, but the www.hpc c.org has so many - many other good programs. === Subject: Re: HP 49G+ Questions OK, OK, c m down, guys === Subject: Re: gener question: HP49G+ > i've been out of HP-situation developments for a longer time, and yesterday > i see HP49G+ in a shop. WHAT? i thought the whole project was dead and > those were notng more than rumours? > anyhow, i was just wondering, what were the practic differences beeen > 49G and 49G+? i read info on HPs site, but that didn't tell me much. Faaaaster (can now INVert num matrices 10*TI speed) Better Garbage Collector, pauses are very short now SD card reader for 1GB extern storage +25% screen screen protector closer to LCD, better view possibilities for ARM9 assembler programming continuing ROM upgrades backup battery instead of a capacitor better keyboard better color scheme [ ' ] and [EV ] as primary keys IR support up to 115,200 USB support up to 115,200 no RS-232C seri no overhead display device connectivity most l games need a rewrite to slow them down some other programs need rewriting gray sc e pictures flicker (a rewrite needed) Forget the trolls and go buy it (year 4000 model eg. seri CH4... ) mine was fixed by wiggling the few stiff keys === Subject: Re: gener question: HP49G+ X > Maybe, if somebody would regulate ts forum he/she could ban But X I herefore ban : Plonk! [Blocking the sender] from my PC === Subject: Re: Emacs 2.00 X > list of changes for details. The documentation for Emacs has been > updated and converted to HTML - a step wch will hopefully inspire > more people to read it. Thanks to Heiko Arnemann who did the > conversion. X AND speci thanks to Yoann for the HTML reader 0.08+ Now I can read the docs from port 2 === Subject: Re: The Big Project > Are there any plans for a complete translation of the current RPL OS to > the ARM arctecture? > > > That would be nice, and here's another thought: > Does anyone know how much of the ROM is consumed in giving the > c culator both RPN and gebraic entry options? I tnk that > if it would save significant space (or any space at l) they > should offer an RPN-only ROM. I'm sure it'll never happen, > but it's a nice thought. Naah! The ' gebraic+Objects' are ready in the system and the G mode is (as well) intern ly RPL the overhead must be minim . It sells the c c and thus gave us the change to have the current faster 49g+. I'm happy (except that JYA killed the V-ENTER for G)