Re: TI or HP?

[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: TI or HP?

Terry Kellerman wrote:
>
> on a complicated subject like mathematics, why would you want a
> complicated calculator?  I've used both a 48 at 92, the 92 blows it out
> of the water in everything, hey the 92 has a faster processor then the
> Sega Genesis!

Hi,

I'm sorry, but I disagree with you on this topic and would like to
share my own experience with both calculators.

I work as a research assistant, and my job often involves the use of
an handheld calculator; moreover, since long time I am interested in
the evolution of the calculator technology and so I follow both the
HP and TI newsgroups and mailing lists.

I used to own both a HP48GX (rev. R) and a TI92 (rev. 1.11), and after
about nine months of heavy use and comparison between the two models,
I decided to give away the TI92 and keep the HP48GX, because:

- the symbolic manipulation capabilities of the 92 are not so useful
  for me, because I know how to do them by hand, often faster than
  the calculator itself. For more complex operations I had to use my
  desktop calculator with Mathematica anyway, because the TI92
  was too slow or unable to help me.

- I like to press as few keys as possible on the calculator to
  perform the operations I want, to improve immediacy and to reduce
  the risk of doing samething wrong. The 48 has a fully
  user-customizable keyboard and multiple hierarchical custom menus
  that, in my opinion, are a lot more powerful than the 92 function
  catalogs, its global custom menu, and its qwerty keyboard.

- the programming language of the 48 is certainly more complex than
  that of the 92 but is more powerful and expressive. For example,
  its capability of directly manipulate program objects in the same
  manner as any other compound object is very interesting and rarely
  found in other programming languages.

- the form factor of the 48 is better suited for handheld applications:
  the 92 must be either handed with both hands or put on a desk to
  be used effectively.

- some of the built-in applications of the 92 are clearly intended
  for in-school use only. For example, I wasn't able to find any
  real-word use for the geometry application.

I agree with you that the 92 has a faster CPU than the 48; this
sometimes, but not always, makes the 92 faster than the 48. For example,
my 92 was actually slower than the 48 doing matrix operations and
polynomial root extraction. Since this depends on the algorythms used
to carry out these calculations, this may not longer be true for
later revisions of the TI92 firmware.

Moreover, the symbolic manipulation capabilities of the 92 are
impressive for an handheld calculator, too, and the AOS is certainly
easier to use than RPL for beginners, but these are the only real-word
advantages I see.

I conclude saying that the 92 certainly is a good tool for high school
and college, if used to actually learn mathematics and not as a
'homework-cruncher', but the 48 is better suited for the other
applications a calculator may have.

With my best wishes,
        Ivan Cibrario


--
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Ivan Cibrario Bertolotti                | Phone: +39-11-3919246
 Television Study Center of the National | Fax:   +39-11-341882
 Research Council, Turin (Italy)         | Email: cibrario@cstv.to.cnr.it
Follow-Ups: References: