B189 I actually prefer to program the calculator (versus C++ or Matlab) for math applications. The calculator has a lot of built in functions (like differentiation and partial fractions) that computer programming languages and some math software packages don't have. Calculators also have neat little tools that write programs for you like the 'DEFINE' command available on the HP 49G+ keyboard ('LS' '2'). This command is also a TI command that is available from one of the 8e9 nested menus in the TI's OS. BTW, the define command takes a function (such as call that function using standard functional notation (on the TI, f(1,2,3) enter; on the hp, 1 2 3 f). I can also say that if you have a programmable calculator, and you're not programming it, you haven't even seen 10% of what the calculator can do. I'll write a little program for anything that I have to do more than four times in a row, just because I know the calculator is infitely better at doing repeated tasks accurately. I heard once that a human can reliably do the same calculation (with different numbers) 12 times before mistakes start occuring. --CS === Subject: Re: How many really program? > I bought both TI and HP calculators and have done math problems with > both. When I started reading about people programming in RPL, ASM, > campus and looking through the NG, it seems like about 80% of the > owners of either just use the functions that come with the > calculators. > I read how one calc is faster than the other to the point > of verbal wars. Does it really make all that much difference for the > majority of users, or is it something the highly technical people > Don Hi Don ! Occurs just the same with cars, computers, and must tools you can buy !!! In my country, must of the 4x4 cars can go anywhere, but must of their owners never left their city, never touch the mud, even knowing the 75% cost of car is because you should need to be prepare for mud. So the question should not be what does the people do with tools?, the real and interesting question is what YOU can do with it !!! Yes, much people have tools for a minimum or not use at all (I have seen brand new cars, boats, computers, etc, just being stock in the owner«s warehouse). The trouble is not in the tool. But for those of us that really want to go to the limit of the tool capacity .... you should try it, and, by the way, IMPROVE YOUR OWN CAPACITY to go farther, faster and better than anybody, to a newer place. That«s the real discusion, what is YOUR capacity to do things with whatever tool you have!!! Must of people does nothing or very little things, because of their VERY SHORT capacity. Daniel === Subject: Re: How many really program? I'd say most of people here (98%?) program or have programmed their calculators, but when I was in college (about 3 years ago) from my group of friends, I'd say 5% did some pretty basic programming, most of them just borrowed some programs I did! It was a mixed sensation of anger and proudness... I was happy to see the usefulness of my programs as an aid to me and some friends, but a little upset for seeing other people (not just my friends) having and excellent course-applied program without expending one little neuron. -- Beto Reply: Erase between the dot (inclusive) and the @. Responder: Borra la frase obvia y el punto previo. === Subject: Re: How many really program? I write programs for my 48GX primarily to add simple job related functions that are not built-in. I know that a lot of people who read this board produce some really impressive calculator software, but I tend to leave the real programming to real computers. (No insult intended) If I find that I frequently need some functional calculation that only requires a few data input entries, I'll write it for the HP in UserRPL. When I first got my need on a day to day basis, I find that I program the HP less and less. > I bought both TI and HP calculators and have done math problems with > both. When I started reading about people programming in RPL, ASM, > campus and looking through the NG, it seems like about 80% of the > owners of either just use the functions that come with the > calculators. I read how one calc is faster than the other to the point > of verbal wars. Does it really make all that much difference for the > majority of users, or is it something the highly technical people > Don === Subject: Re: How many really program? I find myself doing the same thing. Although I have to admit for the work I do programming my 32sii and now my 33s is faster and easier. Most of the time I have a problem I need to solve ten or so times in a day and then never have to go back to it again. I've looked into programming my 48 and now my 49 and the amount of time I would need to invest in learning the ins and outs of programing it would be better spent learning how to program for my palm or honing my perl, C and C++ skills. : I write programs for my 48GX primarily to add simple job related functions : that are not built-in. I know that a lot of people who read this board : produce some really impressive calculator software, but I tend to leave the : real programming to real computers. (No insult intended) If I find that I : frequently need some functional calculation that only requires a few data : input entries, I'll write it for the HP in UserRPL. When I first got my : need on a day to day basis, I find that I program the HP less and less. : > I bought both TI and HP calculators and have done math problems with : > both. When I started reading about people programming in RPL, ASM, : > campus and looking through the NG, it seems like about 80% of the : > owners of either just use the functions that come with the : > calculators. I read how one calc is faster than the other to the point : > of verbal wars. Does it really make all that much difference for the : > majority of users, or is it something the highly technical people : > Don -- Keep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- fwp@deepthought.com === Subject: Re: How many really program? > I bought both TI and HP calculators and have done math problems with > both. When I started reading about people programming in RPL, ASM, > campus and looking through the NG, it seems like about 80% of the > owners of either just use the functions that come with the > calculators. I read how one calc is faster than the other to the point > of verbal wars. Does it really make all that much difference for the > majority of users, or is it something the highly technical people Technical mumbo-jumbo i would say :-) nothing to worry about -good point though, you got both units, so you won't get left behind by HP users :-) manjo === Subject: Re: How many really program? posting-account=pV_biQ0AAADoB9PiKLE6iUQDWNb_aN1m Why do you ask _us_ that? :-)) (We are powerUsers. We are a little subjective.; ) === Subject: Re: How many really program? But it is really nice when someone comes up with a good peice of software for the calculator. Mick Carey www.deakin.edu.au/~mpcare/ > Why do you ask _us_ that? :-)) > (We are powerUsers. We are a little subjective.; ) === Subject: Re: To 49g+ or not to 49g+ X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original > Wait until the next 1.24 ROM > If lowering the screen redraw tasks priority is the key (pun intended) > then it should be easy for HPQ to fix it > [VPN] It seems that it just might be so there is a slight change that the ROM rumours are just rumors I'm sorry for the great possibility of both missleading information and perhaps wrongly introduced false hope [VPN] PS: It just might be bettter to wait for Qonos.... BUT If the Qonos keyboard is no good...... you know what happens.... . === Subject: Re: hpGcc X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original >> PS: Titanic will soon sink >> when it hits the underlying HP ARM cool ice mountain power > LOL! Actually I'm waiting for the Qonos in order to use BOTH the TI-89 and the HP 49 (plus the MathExplorer) [VPN] PS: Is Mathematica written in C? === Subject: Re: OPEN FIRE 1.6 >>>>> All you will need to do in your code is: replace GOSBVL address (where you called OUT=C) or OUT=C itself (if you used it in your program) with different address. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<< same solution as pageflipping ?? You copy your ARM sound routine to a specified address ?? > OPEN FIRE > -good news in sound section > http://fly.cc.fer.hr/~manjo/openfire > manjo === Subject: Re: OPEN FIRE 1.6 >>>>> > All you will need to do in your code is: > replace GOSBVL address (where you called OUT=C) or OUT=C itself (if you used > it in your program) > with different address. > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > same solution as pageflipping ?? You copy your ARM sound routine to a > specified address ?? Yes and no -i won't copy my sound routine, i't will be replacement for OUT=C (only sound -not keyboad scan) i could copy it to fixed address or programmer choosen i migt inlude my sound routine for PCM sounds later -if there will be a need for it. idea in development : ---------------------- Claudio made a nice ARM tools which align ARM code -works for Port 2 (from what i can gather). I'm gonna make a bit different approach for OPENFIRE i'm gonna create a ARM pool (memory area where ARM routines will be copied) -each time you copy(add) some ARM routine -it will be added to the pool, system will give you its entry point manjo === Subject: Re: OPEN FIRE 1.6 Getting ready to release version 1.7 page converter in ARM is gonna be more tricky than its Saturn relative, however i belive it will be at least 50 times faster. i'm gonna include sound functionality in to the INITPF you will like it, calling wil be similar like for page converter, OUT=C substitute will be on known offset from the address where you installed page converter. For example: if you installed page converter to #80100, sound trigger will be at #80100+200 INITPF is employing a bit diffrent ARM lounching principle, compared to what i've seen so far :-) implementation is therefore seamless (simple GOSBVL call) stay tuned, v1.7 is comming soon : http://fly.cc.fer.hr/~manjo/openfire manjo === :)) Pig is MY surname. Lilian Pigallio. > Is this a good place to meet women? > Jay the Pig === You spoiled the image I had in my mind of Father Joe! -- Beto Reply: Erase between the dot (inclusive) and the @. Responder: Borra la frase obvia y el punto previo. === Subject: Re: hp49g+ my opinion GOOD NEWS I REALLY hate to say this, but personally, I feel we have the right to insist on 100% keystroke recognition - 99% means 1 in 100 answers can be wrong, which I find unacceptable. > Hello all ! > I must share with you my joy after using my replaced calc for one week > now. > About one year ago I bought the hp49g+, it was a CN333... > A month ago I decided to replace it since the keys were too loud for > me and not usable in tests and the dot key had broken and leaned on > its side. > Last week I got the replacement. > CNA419... > Please refer what I am going to tell you as my opinion only. I am not > from Hp or something and do not want to mistake others but this is my > experience : > The keys are VERY quiet. At least enough quiet for tests and there is > a great difference from my first calc. > I do miss some keypresses from time to time but this is not so bad as > the first calc and not worse than any other claculator in the market. > 99% of the time the calc DO NOT miss any keypress. > I must tell you I am so happy now with my hp49g+. I loved the > calculator before but the keyboard issue made me hate the first one. > Also the it feels much more solid now. You cannot hear the spring > and the calculator plastic case seems less hollow. > I also noticed the keys are not moving from side to side as the first > one and seems more attached to the board under. > In my opinion, HP DID listened. and I must say I am very surprised. > I guess you will hear this opinion from others too about the CNA > series. > By the way, I could not know the serial until I opened the blister > pack. > Ok guys, I guess this is the end of the story for me. I love ny > hp49g+. I just hope it will live long... > Bye, > Idan === Subject: Re: hp49g+ my opinion GOOD NEWS > I REALLY hate to say this, but personally, I feel we have the right to > insist on 100% keystroke recognition - 99% means 1 in 100 answers can be > wrong, which I find unacceptable. Actually, since you rarely ever have a calculation that only requires a single keypress, things are much, much worse than this. Missing one key in 100 key presses means that you have a calculator that may be a neat toy, but that is entirely unsuitable for any serious work... -- Helen. === Subject: Re: hp49g+ my opinion GOOD NEWS For me I can get limited functionality out of it by keeping the keyclick on (which annoys me greatly) - but I know exactly what you mean and agree whole-heartedly with you. === Subject: Re: HP-33S tricks & ruminations Hello John (and Joel) > RPN. I replaced that with a Casio FX-790P 'palmtop' PC, which I'd > have to say is really not much bigger than an HP-33S but blows it > ---Joel Kolstad > There was a Casio 802P that from the 80s that blows everything current away > too. It was small, powerful and batteries lasted forever. Someone's missed > the boat big-time. Sorry guys but you are both way out of line here! You are talking about pityful BASIC pocket computers. These toys your mention could not (can not) compete against a formidable HP71B (HP BASIC) pocket computer of the same era with programmable user fonts, redefinable keyboard (all keys), clock-calendar-timer alarms, etc. None of the toys you mentioned supported any of the above. Wake up! !Demeter! === Subject: Re: User's Manual for the 49G+ thanxs... You know I really don't understand hp's theory anymore. I have had hp-48sx's 41cv's etc...they all had excellant Printed manuals....the current manual is hard to use becuase it is not printed...and honestly I don't think it's very good. I wish they would get there act together. Merlyn ps...I still love my calc... maybe the Qonos will have a better manual. > Hello Merlyn, > that was my original question when I first posted my message. I called > HP Calculator Support in the US and the guy, helpful as he was, said > that he did not even know such a printed manual existed. He said there > was no printed manual for the calculators sold in the US and that if the > european ones have it, then most likely HP Europe could have an English > version of the manual. Two other posters have sent links to places where > you can order it in German, but it could be worth a try asking these > people if they also have the ability to get it in English. Give that a try. > Hope this helps > Alejandro. >Hello Alejandro, >At Dynatech you can get the Bedienungsanleitung f.9fr den HP49G+ for 24,95 Euro + >shipping. See http://www.dynatech.de/ >Peter >>Hola Alexis, >> >>I also read, write and speak German perfectly. El espa.96ol es mi lengua >>materna, und ich habe 5 Jahre lang in Deustchland gewohnt. >> >>will try and see if I can get a hold of a printed copy. I know about >>dead trees, but I need the physical sensation of a book in my hands, >>specially such a long one, as it makes it easier than looking at the screen. >> >>Muchas gracias. >> >>Alejandro >> >> >> >>>Hi Alejandro, >>> >>>probably I Could talk to you in Spanish, but I am not sure, so I >>>choose English. >>> >>>I bought the hp49g+ Bedienungsanleitung (hp49g+ User's Guide, >>>German, about 1000 pages) from http://www.math-college.org/Shop/ >>> >>>It costs EUR 27,90. I am sure you can get it cheaper (but not much) >>>somewhere else, but I do not konw where. It should also be possible to >>>get the original (?) english version, but again I do not know where. I >>>just live in Germany and can read German well, so it is all right for >>>me. >>> >>>I hope I could help, >>> >>>Alexis >>> >>> >>> >> >>I have the PDF. But printing out 1000 pages is not my idea of fun (nor a >>cheap way to use my HP ink cartridges). I should have asked whether >>somebody knew if one could order a printed copy from HP? >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>Try this. Its a PDF (and 10.5mb) so you'll have to wait for it and print it >>>out: >>> >>>http://h10032.www1.hp.com/ctg/Manual/bpia5324.pdf >>> >>> >>> >> is there an english version? >> in book form? >>> >>> >>> >>>>Hello all, >>>> >>>>I have a question about the documentation that comes with the 49G+. I was >>>>looking around Ebay Germany and found somebody selling a 49G+ with TWO >>>>manuals: 1) the normal User's Manual (the small one I got with mine) and >>>>2) a PRINTED copy of the Instructions Manual (over 1000 pages). >>>> >>>>My question is this: does anybody know how to get a copy of this book? or >>>>is it only shipped with the european version of the calculator? I assume >>>>this is the same book that comes on the CD, but I would love to have a >>>>printed copy, even if it is in German. >>>> >>>> >>>>Alejandro >>> >>> >>> === Subject: Re: User's Manual for the 49G+ >thanxs... >You know I really don't understand hp's theory anymore. >I have had hp-48sx's 41cv's etc...they all had excellant >Printed manuals....the current manual is hard >to use becuase it is not printed...and honestly >I don't think it's very good. Back in the 80s and early 90s when the 41 and 48 SX came out the internet wasn't everywhere. Not everyone had CDROM drives in their computers. Now, well you know... The pdf manual is fully searchable, which makes it better than a paper manual- you can find what you want and go right to it with a click or two- no thumbing through pages. A pdf file can be updated just like the ROM in the calculator. If they printed a manual and then changed the ROM, they'd have to send out errata sheets- who wants to keep track of that stuff? I think about the only improvement they could make on the manual is if the whole thing could be put in the calculator and searched/read on the screen. With the SD card slot, maybe it can be done that way... Now if only they'd do something about the keyboard... === Subject: Re: User's Manual for the 49G+ Personally I MUCH prefer a paper manual. If I have to get on a computer to figure out how to use my calculator, whats the point of the calculator? My computer can do way more than my calculator. A calculator is designed to be small and portable. Tying it to a computer with the manual is just silly. === Subject: Re: User's Manual for the 49G+ X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original > Personally I MUCH prefer a paper manual. If I have to get on a computer > to > figure out how to use my calculator, whats the point of the calculator? > My > computer can do way more than my calculator. > A calculator is designed to be small and portable. Tying it to a computer > with the manual is just silly. Yes - the manual should be release on a SD card inluded with every calculator Maybe something like TVG Plus+ http://www.hpcalc.org/details.php?id=6034 or maybe even hyperlinked Navigator 0.08+ http://www.hpcalc.org/details.php?id=6001 or something totally new? [VPN] === Subject: Re: User's Manual for the 49G+ well..the keyboard is better now right? merlyn >>thanxs... >>You know I really don't understand hp's theory anymore. >>I have had hp-48sx's 41cv's etc...they all had excellant >>Printed manuals....the current manual is hard >>to use becuase it is not printed...and honestly >>I don't think it's very good. > Back in the 80s and early 90s when the 41 and 48 SX came out the > internet wasn't everywhere. Not everyone had CDROM drives in their > computers. Now, well you know... > The pdf manual is fully searchable, which makes it better than a paper > manual- you can find what you want and go right to it with a click or > two- no thumbing through pages. A pdf file can be updated just like > the ROM in the calculator. If they printed a manual and then changed > the ROM, they'd have to send out errata sheets- who wants to keep > track of that stuff? > I think about the only improvement they could make on the manual is if > the whole thing could be put in the calculator and searched/read on > the screen. With the SD card slot, maybe it can be done that way... > Now if only they'd do something about the keyboard... === Subject: Trig Identity Problem I was reading the most excellent Trigonometry Marathon for the HP calc which is downloadable from hpcalc.org. I am not understanding one of the (probably very basic) steps introduced in this marathon for solving an identity. They have: tan^2(x) = 1-cos^2(x) -------------- cos^2(x) and from that they end up with in the next step: tan^2(x) = 1 ------------- -1 cos^2(x) I am not understanding how or why it goes from the first form to the second, could someone explain what mathmatics went on between those two steps in the transformation? Brian === Subject: Re: Trig Identity Problem > I was reading the most excellent Trigonometry Marathon for the HP calc > which is downloadable from hpcalc.org. I am not understanding one of > the (probably very basic) steps introduced in this marathon for > solving an identity. > They have: > tan^2(x) = 1-cos^2(x) > -------------- > cos^2(x) > and from that they end up with in the next step: > tan^2(x) = 1 > ------------- -1 > cos^2(x) > I am not understanding how or why it goes from the first form to the > second, could someone explain what mathmatics went on between those > two steps in the transformation? > Brian He just split the fraction apart into: 1/cos^2(x)-cos^2(x)/cos^2(x) This is the reverse of the process of adding two fractions with the same denominator. When adding fractions, you just keep the denominator and add the numerators. You can also accomplish the same thing through polynomial division, if you rearrange the numerator into -cos^2(x)+1, then divide each term by cos^2(x). IMO this identity is easier to prove using the pythagorean identity (sin^2(x)+cos^2(x)=1), but I don't really know what context this was presented within. Nick's trig marathion is kind of a big document :) --CS === Subject: Re: Trig Identity Problem > I was reading the most excellent Trigonometry Marathon for the HP calc > which is downloadable from hpcalc.org. I am not understanding one of > the (probably very basic) steps introduced in this marathon for > solving an identity. > They have: > tan^2(x) = 1-cos^2(x) > -------------- > cos^2(x) > and from that they end up with in the next step: > tan^2(x) = 1 > ------------- -1 > cos^2(x) > I am not understanding how or why it goes from the first form to the > second, could someone explain what mathmatics went on between those > two steps in the transformation? > Brian It's just expansion: (a-b)/c -> a/c-b/c, or in this case (1-cos(x)^2)/cos(x)^2 -> 1/cos(x)^2-cos(x)^2/cos(x)^2. . === Subject: Re: Trig Identity Problem X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original 1-A ---- A or (1-A)/A = (1/A)-(A/A)=(1/A)-1 [VPN] >I was reading the most excellent Trigonometry Marathon for the HP calc > which is downloadable from hpcalc.org. I am not understanding one of > the (probably very basic) steps introduced in this marathon for > solving an identity. > They have: > tan^2(x) = 1-cos^2(x) > -------------- > cos^2(x) > and from that they end up with in the next step: > tan^2(x) = 1 > ------------- -1 > cos^2(x) > I am not understanding how or why it goes from the first form to the > second, could someone explain what mathmatics went on between those > two steps in the transformation? > Brian === Subject: ADV: HP 48 AUR Advanced User's Ref. eBay http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=5727138152 === Subject: Vectors that contain fractions on HP49g How can you enter a vector that contains fractions? (HP49g in RPN mode) For example, suppose I want to make this vector: [5/13, 12/13]. Typing: [] 5 Enter 13 / ... creates [5] because the Enter terminates entry of the vector. Putting 5/13, 12/13 on the stack and then doing ->V2 gives me this message: ->V2 Error: Bad Argument Type. I'd rather not use real-number approximations in place of the fractions if at all possible. Ben Kovitz Caltech http://sbml.org === Subject: Re: Vectors that contain fractions on HP49g X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original Use the Matrix Writer and inside of it start the Equation Writer or simply key it directly in to the command line Have you tried 2 ->ARRY ['V-P' 'N'] > How can you enter a vector that contains fractions? (HP49g in RPN > mode) > For example, suppose I want to make this vector: [5/13, 12/13]. > Typing: > [] > 5 > Enter > 13 > / > ... > creates [5] because the Enter terminates entry of the vector. > Putting 5/13, 12/13 on the stack and then doing ->V2 gives me this > message: ->V2 Error: Bad Argument Type. > I'd rather not use real-number approximations in place of the > fractions if at all possible. > Ben Kovitz > Caltech > http://sbml.org === Subject: Re: Faster Best fractions on the HP49 > I hadn't looked carefully at what Joe was doing. > I mistakenly thought he might be using some of > the fancy improvements to a straignt binary search > Knuth and others talk about. Not in PDQ*2*. ;-) -Joe- === Subject: Re: Faster Best fractions on the HP49 X-NNTP-Client: ROBOT/LX -=[ Thu, 21.10.04 8:45 p.m. +1300 (NZDT) ]=- Hi Rodger Rosenbaum ! in message ID : >>Even for the famous PI 13131 440 10^x / example the difference >>was only 14 seconds = 7m24sec-7m10sec. It has C=432 and >>Q=20776. Interesting how that added 14 seconds - I was >>expecting less than for examples 2 and 13 above... it must >>have been trickier for bisection for some reason... or the >>timings are dependant on other conditions - I was walking the >>dog by the river with the 49g+ in my pocket for this one. I >>almost suspect I ran the same program twice. > Here's a case where most of the time is spent finding the > partial quotients. The fourteen second difference is no > doubt the difference between the binary search method and > my new method. I bet if one were to check timings at the > right place, finding the PQ's probably takes about 7m10s. Since then I've been timing the second part. For some reason the one-off PDR caclulation can be quite slow. I can't figure out why but it is something to do with holding large integers in the stack. I almost think it is quicker to give then names and store then and recall them ... must do more research. -- Tony Hutchins === Subject: replacing battery for hp 48s I have an HP 48S that's about 10 years old. I am wondering if it is ever necessary/possible to replace the internal battery on it. As you may know, this calculator has no ports to There definitely is an internal battery because I did a test where I stored a variable, took out the main 3 AAA batteries, and when I put them back in, the variable was still in memeory. DN === Subject: Re: replacing battery for hp 48s >I have an HP 48S that's about 10 years old. I am wondering >if it is ever necessary/possible to replace the internal battery >on it. As you may know, this calculator has no ports to >There definitely is an internal battery because I did a test >where I stored a variable, took out the main 3 AAA batteries, >and when I put them back in, the variable was still in memeory. Ther is no internal battery in the 48. It is a small capacitor that keeps the memory intact for a few minutes until you replace the three AAA batteries. their contents. Harold A. Climer Dept,Of Physics,Geology & Astronomy U.T.Chattanooga Room 318 Grote Hall 615 McCallie Ave Chattanooga TN 37403 423-425-4546 === Subject: 49G+ Reset warning After my post-warranty HP49G+ decided one day (night, actually, while it was off) to hang with nothing but a black stripe on the display, I tried to reset it using the reset button on the back. This made the stripe disappear, but the calculator never again responded to anything. I tried leaving the batteries out for a while and hitting the reset button again, but no response. Since I had nothing to lose, I decided to take a look inside, mostly to see how hard it would be to take it apart. When I did, I noticed that the reset button was cocked diagonally in its spring, thus making it permanently depressed. I pushed the button back in place, and now the calculator works again. I know most of you probably hit the reset button without problems (perhaps even frequently), but I thought I would let you know that it can go wrong. Be careful when pressing the reset button in the back; it's probably safer to mess with the batteries if the calculator hangs badly (or if you need to do an OS update). === Subject: Re: TI-89 Titanium instead of HP 49g+? > Woooahh maan -do these people have eyes ? > Do they comapare their product to G+ ?? > Is 12 MHz motorolla realy a match for modern 200 MHz ARM ??? Sorry, but you are the one being silly here... First of all the 49g+ only runs at 75 MHz, not 200 MHz. The fact that it can run at 200 MHz is really a very minor detail as it would run thru batteries like crazy. Second, it uses and emulated system that further limits it's speed. So as a calculator for doing calculations, the TI can easily be compared to the 49g+. And supposedly even comes out on top much of the time. Add to this that the 49g+ has keyboard problems, and the 49g+ just looks bad. As for user programming... On paper the 49g+ does indeed look much better than the TI. But that really means little in the real world. Fact is there are many many more TI users, programmers, and programs. This alone will more than make up for any short-commings the TI may have. And they are both still just calcuators with small limited displays. As such they don't really NEED that great of a processor. I'm sure you can find a few cases where the faster processor is really needed, but for the most part it's just not needed. So trying to brag up the 49g+ over the TI-89 Titanium is really nothing more than a worthless pissing contest. And really only means anything to the jerks in the contest. === Subject: Re: TI-89 Titanium instead of HP 49g+? Maybe all of TI users never had or has used a HP calculator. This is because, after learn how to use well my hp49g+ (forgoting the hardware problems of it...) i never will back to a terrenal calculator, like CASIO, SHARP or TI. HP calculator is like another kind of calculator, much more like a portable computer than handsheld calc. RPN rules, UserRPL is really great, the OS of HP is perfect made. I think: All real HP users became hp-lovers, but al X-brand calculator users just *like* their calc over the others (just know of it works). Just looking the keys and the screen, you can use a TI. They are not learning step. HP calc need like a weeks of playing with they, to get some practise. I have mine for about 14 months and I never stop to learn new things on my calc, whatever you what to do, there is a function, or program, or you can implement it on UserRPL. UserRPL is so powerful, only for testings I can implement a profiler tool for UserRPL language just using the same UserRPL: http://foros.utalca.cl/icc/viewtopic.php?t=194 (Sorry is in spanish, I am Avatar, this forum is of my carreer) The only weak point of HP49g+ is their hardware (shit-made but gold inside :D) finally: The 200 MHZ ARM (MODERN) Processor is just emulating an old *overclocked* Saturn. This is because HP49g+ is just 4 times more faster than HP49, the emulation layer requieres a lot of processing power. This is not bad, PALM does the same, because rewrite all the OS for a new ASSEMBLY instructions is a hard work, and the work of years developing 48 series, 49g will lose. PD: Sorry my english :P === Subject: Re: TI-89 Titanium instead of HP 49g+? > Just looking the keys and the screen, you can use a TI. Most people would consider that an advantage :) -- === Subject: Re: TI-89 Titanium instead of HP 49g+? > Maybe all of TI users never had or has used a HP calculator. This is > because, after learn how to use well my hp49g+ (forgoting the hardware > problems of it...) i never will back to a terrenal calculator, like > CASIO, SHARP or TI. I don't agree with that at all. I also enjoy my 49G+ more than the TI calculators I've tried; but there are certainly TI users who have seriously tried HP calculators and did not like them. > HP calculator is like another kind of calculator, much more like a > portable computer than handsheld calc. RPN rules, UserRPL is really > great, the OS of HP is perfect made. I think: All real HP users > became hp-lovers, but al X-brand calculator users just *like* their > calc over the others (just know of it works). Let's not fall into the trap of thinking everything is great just because it's HP. UserRPL, for example (and SysRPL as well) is incredibly difficult to use for serious programming tasks, hence my interest in hpgcc. The only time I tried to write something in SysRPL, I ended up having to drop stack diagram comments every third or fourth line just to be able to find everything, and I finally gave up. RPN for data entry is fine when you can look at the stack on the screen, but UserRPL and SysRPL are, frankly, among the worst programming languages I have ever seen. -- www.designacourse.com The Easiest Way to Train Anyone... Anywhere. Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer/Technical Trainer MindIQ Corporation === Subject: Re: TI-89 Titanium instead of HP 49g+? Avatar_e... you just bring tears in to my eyes, your english is great -don't be ashamed, your speach is speach of love -you should start learning french. Yes Chriss we are all aware that there are bugs and all and belive me everynone who realy got to know the insides of G+ -like Avatar -will just love G+ over any calculator. (of course, i am speaking this way because i feel that way myself) everything about why Saturn is emulated EVERYTHING is right what Avatar_e said. we are aware that there are issues with G+ nevertheless G+ is the bright light at the end of a loong tunel (where loong tunel is symbolizing all the mumbo-jumbo :-) that can be found on the market these days) i mean : just look at TI and tell me it's better looking (i would rather kill mysef than say something like that) manjo ...didn't bought G+ because it's a HP -i do belive a lot of people did, maybe they expected even more, just because it is HP, anyway... -i bought it because i saw it's beauty, and a beast waiting to be unleashed :-) <- what about poetry eh ? === Subject: Re: TI-89 Titanium instead of HP 49g+? I'm sorry Luke, i hope you won't mind me saying so : If nowdays somone produces Z80 with new technologies available 15 MHz is by far not astronomical. For a processor of such simplicity 400 MHz would not be astronomical either. Z80 is as old and as used up as 68000, why don't they break loose from these old-timers anyway i hope they do have programmers who will master new processors. while they are at Zilog processors why don't they use Z8000 -this was newer a commercial success people said because it was ahead of it's time too much, so i guess if TI uses it now, it will be JIT (just in time) :-) another thing that you mentioned, is that you have several HW versions number of SW versions of the same model (eg. TI-89) -then when you combine all variations you get following : By saying I own a TI-92 or 89 you in fact didn't ay anything -one should elaborate a bit more like : i have TI-89, HW: 3, SW 2.4 built in 1994. with additional turbocharger, and custom wheels and exhaust system :-) (i'm joking a bit -we must keep good spirits in these sharp debates ;-) manjo === Subject: Re: TI-89 Titanium instead of HP 49g+? X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original > By saying I own a TI-92 or 89 you in fact didn't ay anything Sort of. There is a significant difference between the capabilities of the TI 92 and the TI 92 Plus. Most notably, you have to hack the original 92 to run ML code. The differences between a 92 upgraded with a Plus module and a 92-Plus are really quite small -- no clock, blueish LCD. The exact same OS file can be installed, and programs that run on one will run on the other, so long as they don't use the clock. Not to mention, the original (without Plus module) 92 did not have Flash ROM, and hence could not be upgraded. Same deal with HW1 and HW2 TI 89's -- the only significant difference is the clock. The same OS file runs on either model. Now, with the TI89 Titanium they have intentionally left incompatibilities -- it starting to look as if TI never intends to release a common OS version between HW3 and (HW1/2) calculators. It appears as if the majority of incompatibilities bewteen different versions of TI's calculators come about because some hack (like gs graphics) that worked in one OS release no longer works in a later release. As stated previously, it is possible to get the same OS version running on all but 2 of the 68k variants that TI produces, so most software incompatibilities come about because ppl don't update their software to be compliant with the newer OSes, and other ppl don't update their calculators to the latest OS versions. Why does TI still use the Z80-based machines? Probably because they figure they have too much of a customer base that is accustomed to a TI83-like system, so they don't want to do anything to upset their hold on the market -- Any changes, such as moving to a newer CPU, might cause glitches that would cost them market share. They have a significant amount of effort and time sunken in the current hardware and software; a new CPU would require them to either abandon all of it, or else put even more effort into an emulated environment. Furthermore, there does not seem to be any shortage in the supply of Z80 CPUs, so they don't have any driving force from a production perspective that would require them to redesign their machines. Their strategy seems to be working; I am the only one at my workplace who even owns an HP calculator, and one of two at my Engineering school who owned one. TI is following the maxim, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. They already have a dominant position in the market; why change anything? === Subject: Re: TI-89 Titanium instead of HP 49g+? X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original > I'm sorry Luke, > i hope you won't mind me saying so : No offence taken at all. Truth be told, I was being a wee bit sarcastic about the wonders of Z80 processors. /slaps self...There I go again... :) I think that they (TI) are sticking to the old, tried & true methods because they are afraid to really innovate. Kudos to HP for being willing to try something that is actually new. === Subject: Re: PDQ Unleashed: No More Limitations > Is the source for your UBASIC program available? http://holyjoe.net/hp/pdq2.txt Just rename it from .TXT to .UB and it'll load directly into UBASIC. If you want to time huge inputs, be sure to comment out all but the final output. -Joe- === Subject: Re: Graphic on the 49G+ Hi Wing Fong Wong, for a filled box command, you can do this : << EVAL ROT EVAL -> x1 y1 x2 y2 << x1 x2 DUP2 IF > THEN SWAP END FOR x x y1 2 ->LIST x y2 2 ->LIST LINE NEXT >> 'FBOX STO FBOX works the same way as BOX command. {#x1 #y1}{#x2 #y2}FBOX Perhaps a better way for the speed in user rpl is to use the GROB and REPL commands. The idea is to use a reverse BLANK command. Gilles Wing Fong Wong a .8ecrit: > {#x1 #y1} > {#x2 #y2} > BOX > to see the box use > {#0 #0} PVIEW > Where x1,y1 is the coordinate of one corner and x2,y2 is the diagonally > opposite corner. > All this assumes your x is less than 131 and y is less than 64. Simple > isn't it? > What I'd like to see if a filled box command. The one above only does a > frame.