Re: 83 vs. 85
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Jon Niehof <uunet!CALVIN.EDU!jnieho38> writes:
> What's more, the average person does not want to put the
> effort into learning the 85. I admit the 85 has a rather
> steep learning curve, but it isn't all *that* bad, and
> once you've learned your way around, it's far easier and
> faster to use than the 82.
Except for the table, but if you need it that bad, you can always find
a program to emulate it.
> The reason that I would go 85 instead of 83 is sheer
> flexibility--strings, infinite numbers of lists, constants,
> etc. etc. The 85 is meant to be a *very* flexible calculator.
I have an 82 and 85, and I have to say that a lot of times, given the
choice for some quick and dirty work, I will go with the 82. The keys
are slightly larger on my 82, and are somehow more tactile, so it makes
prolonged list entry faster than on the 85.
The screen doesn't affect my eyes as much since the numbers are bigger,
and typing numbers and arrows to get around the menus is faster sometimes
than shifting through a catalog or pressing MORE six times to get to
a certain menu portion...
<pre>
---
Rob Carlson .. Mail rob@cola.castle.net
Pager 908-937-0452 .. Mail over 16kb to rob@cola.westmark.com
</pre>
References: