Re: HP's and TI's calculator output rate
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: HP's and TI's calculator output rate
Aaron Wallace wrote in message <35D4B818.592EC7A@cyberramp.net>...
>
>Richard Goedeken wrote:
>
>> Yeah, I never really got into learning how to use it well maybe because
>> personally
>> I believe that (for me at least) the calculator should work the way I
>> want it to,
>> not the other way around.. And the 48 just didn't work the way I wanted
>> it to..
>> The way that it expected you to give it parameters, the programming
>> language,
>> everything seemed fubared.
<snip>
After learning how to use an HP calculator (~20 years ago), all the TI's,
Casio's and their ilk always seemed to me to be awkward and backwards to
use. I knew how to use them long before I got an HP, but it didn't take much
time _using_ the HP to recognize that it had the superior way of doing
things.
Everyone's got their own tastes, but this complaint sounds like one from the
1910's or `20's that automobiles were just fubared because their controls
were all goofy. No reins to control its movements, no response to vocal
commands, and spurs don't accomplish _anything_, no matter how hard you dig
them in -- all you've got are a wheel, some pedals and some levers. Nope,
too damned hard to learn and just too different. Horses are familiar, so
there's no point in wasting any time learning how to drive a car... Which is
all right by me -- to each his own. Of course, such attitudes truly mystify
me!
>> I'm not even talking about the GUI being slow.. Just try and add a
>> string of
>> numbers. I haven't used one in a while, but I remember the data entry
>> being
>> excruciatingly slow.. Say you wanted to do 1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9
>> (hypothetical
>> example).. As fast as you can, hit 1<enter>2<plus>3<plus>4<plus>etc...
>> The damn
>> thing would bog down, fill up the keyboard buffer, etc, and you'd be
>> waiting
>> a couple of seconds for the fricking result.
I seriously wonder about this. I've seen _no_ such behavior on my HP-48! The
only way I can outrun the display is hold one finger on one number key and
another finger on an operation key, and then alternately press both keys
like mad. And even then, it only takes 0.1 or 0.2 seconds to catch up after
a long string of operations. For real-world data entry, this claim seems
bogus to me.
>> To me that is
>> unacceptable. With
>> the 85 you just punch the string in, hit the enter key, and bam there
>> you go.
And that's how it is on my HP-48. Funny how that works... :)
>For something like this, if the RPN bugs you, you can always press the
algebraic
>delimiters and then enter everything as you would on an alg calc and then
EVAL...
Absolutely! And then you can type in all the parenthesis (to control
operator precedence) that your little heart desires, parenthesis that RPN
eliminates.
>> > This statement is entirely invalid. The HP48 does not use any such
"object
>> > oriented" design. You are confusing HP "objects" with something like
C++
>> > "objects". HP "objects" are simply a means of separating data types
(like stings,
>> > reals, binaries, etc.).
>>
>> HP seems to think they do.. I bought the 48 programming manual, and
>> started
>> reading it. On one of the first pages it said something like "at HP we
>> encourage
>> an object-oriented approach to programming, so blahblahblah..." At that
>> point I
>> think I closed the book and didn't open it again.
>
>I cannot find any such statement in the users manual or the AUR. I can
assure you that
>the 48 uses no object-oriented programming. I have programmed on it for a
few years now
>in both the user and the system language and it is not OOP. If you consult
the good old
>RPLMAN, William Wicks could tell you that HP "objects" are nothing more
than data
>types. OOP includes (but is not limited to) the following :
>
>- POLYMORPHISM - the only one that the *user* language supports due to
special
>implemtation of the system code
>- CLASS - the 48 supports data types, but not classes
>- INHERITANCE - the 48 does not support this
>
>Something like C++ supports a "hierarchy" of objects, the 48 does not
support this
>either. Don't misunderstand: the 48 has the tools to implement OOP to some
degree, but
>it is not present unless under special implementation. Bottom line is:
the 48 is not
>OOP. period.
Though HP does misuse the term "object" (as the rest of the computer science
world has come to use it) in their manuals. Nowhere, though, can I find
anything that says that HP or its calculators use an "object-oriented
approach" or that the calculator is "object-oriented." What HP calls an
"object" in its calculators is just a tagged data type.
>> > This depends on how well the "environment" was set up on the HP. The
calc is,
>> > what I would call, "highly customizable". If set up properly, the user
can access
>> > just about any function directly from the stack. TIs seem to be a bit
more "user
>> > friendly" and that is why people settle for what takes the least effort
to learn.
>>
>> Similarly, X win is more configurable than windows, but personally (hey
>> I know this
>> sucks, I hate MS just as much as anyone else) I think that windows has a
>> better
>> interface than X, and I dont even think you can even configure X to be
>> as good as
>> win.. Sure win crashes all the time, but thats another story.. I guess
>> I'm the
>> kind of person who doesn't really want to fuck around with learning how
>> to set
>> everything up when I can get a calc that works right out of the box.
>
>Similarly, a calculator is more configurable than an abucus, but personally
(hey
>I know this
>sucks, I hate the abucus just as much as anyone else) I think that the
abucus has a
>better
>interface than calculators, and I dont even think you can even configure
calculators to
>be
>as good asan abucus.. Sure an abucus has it's limitations, but thats
another story..I
>guess I'm the
>kind of person who doesn't really want to fuck around with learning how
>to set
>everything up when I can get a abucus that works right out of the box.
>
>Wouldn't it be worth the time and effort to learn how to use a more
powerful device???
Most people would think so, but there's always those dogs too old to learn
new tricks, apparently. I'm guessing that he must have learned how to use a
computer sometime after Windows came out, since he's not bitching about how
different it is from DOS or Unix shells and how he can't be bothered to
learn how to use a GUI... Probably didn't spend much time trying to learn
how to configure an X window manager if he thinks Windows is superior. It's
a hell of a lot harder to set up well than MS-Windows, but it is far more
flexible. The only I don't have in my AfterStep WM setup that MS-Windows
does is drag-and-drop -- something I never use anyway.
>> > There is plenty of nice freeware for the HP48. I will agree that
"out-of-box" the
>> > HP48 does lack in many symbolic areas, but for anyone who bothers to
look, there
>> > is freeware available that will blow away any TI8x and is very
comparable to the
>> > 92 in symbolic manipulation. If there was anything that I would remove
from the
>> > ROM of the HP, it would be the equation library. It's use is limited
and there
>> > are many other things that would be better in it's place.
>>
>> Yeah, I hacked a link cable and threw a few games on the 48 when I had
>> it.. That
>> was all fucked up too. All these bullshit libraries to deal with, and
>> you had
>> to go through all these screwy commands to get anything to run,
>
>It is not difficult. The manual outlines how this is to done in chapter 28
under "To
>set up a library:". Libraries are very useful. The idea is to store data
and
>applications that are used frequently and are not made to be modified in a
library and
>when this is done, that app acts as a ROM pointer instead of an indentifier
(variable).
>Libraries are compact and any library progra that calls another program is
converted to
>a ROMPTR instead of an ID making it very fast.
>
>> and I
>> was never
>> really sure how to delete things
>
>This is also clearly outlined in the users manual. It is very simple and
quick. There
>are multiple ways to do this. You can PURGE many vars using a list {} or
one var by
>using the tick marks ' ' and then press PURGE. This is a very simple
operation... I
>don't know why it was giving you so much difficulty...
Don't you remember? He opened the manual, saw the word "object," and closed
it again. Of course, I suppose it's HP's fault that he can't be bothered to
read the manual.
>> or find out what existed and was taking
>> up
>> memory..
>
>anything listed in the VARS menu visible at the bottom of the stack is
stored in user
>memory. The VARS command brings up a list of all variables stored in user
mem and the
>command PVARS brings up a list of all vars / libs stored in the specified
port. That's
>not so painful now is it?
But what totally weird commands! I'll bet the TI calcs don't have _anything_
so cryptic! ;-)
>> AFU.. Totally AFU. I learned how to do these tasks, but then
>> I'd forget
>> again because they were so strange. Personally I like the 92 with the
>> Fargo shell.
>> Easy to run programs, easy to check memory usage and delete. Piece of
>> cake.
>
>There are filers available that do a very nice job of exactly that. You
just have to
>look for them as you did for the games. If you had problems, then you
could have posted
>here and anyone would have been happy to help you. There is a FAQ
available that covers
>some things that are not addressed in the users manual and some that are.
Instead, you
>post here explaining how the 48 is so crappy and is so hard to use without
ever having
>asked for help. Don't be so quick to point the finger when you haven't
bothered to ask
>first. This is a lesson I have learned many-a-time here and I have looked
like a fool
>just as you do when you first posted in this chain.
I'd feel more sympathy for him if that was all he failed to do. By his own
admission, the manual offended him and he couldn't be bothered to read it,
let alone try to learn from it.
>> Yeah, you're right, the 48 does have much nicer solid-feeling keys than
>> the TIs..
>> That was never really that important to me. To each his own.
>
>True.. whatever floats your boat...
>
>> I don't know that I had very limited experience - I owned one for over a
>> year.
>
>That's plenty of time to become accustomed to using the 48. If the uses
were few and
>long between, then I can understand, but if you used it often and were
still baffled
>about the basic memory usage, etc.. then I can offer no reasonable
explanation of why
>you had trouble with it.
I can, Aaron. Several, in fact. Unfortunately, I'm afraid, none of them are
very flattering to Richard, so I won't list them. I'll just assume he didn't
use it very often and put in little or no effort to learn how to use it.
>> I liked the cloth carrying case - that was nice, as well as the feel of
>> the calc
>> (casing, buttons, etc) HP did a nice job with those regards. I never
>> found anything
>> that the 48 did that the 85 couldn't,
>
>You didn't look hard enough. Look a little harder... Is the 85 expandable
up to 4 meg
>of RAM? Does the 85 have an IR port? Does the 85 have a clock? How about
17 different
>plot types, alarms, ports, access to 3 programming languages, etc, etc?
>
>> and to me the fact that the 85
>> felt so much
>> faster (computing, entering data, etc) was the most important thing..
>
>Like I said, it depends on what you use: built-in functions or re-written
ml
>functions. There is a replacement for just about everything.
The _display_ is faster on the TI, but not much else. In fact, it's _very
much slower_ on matrix operations than the HP. And Aaron is right, there are
replacements for most things. Better and faster stack displays, _much_
faster EquationWriter, MatrixWriter, string editor, etc. Basically, you get
back what you put into it (i.e., if you put in little effort, don't expect
big results).
>> I
>> can deal
>> with the cheap case and buttons. Hopefully I wont be taking any
>> standardized tests
>> anymore (not planning on grad skool right now). You're right about the
>> 92 being
>> too big; that kinda sucks, although having a big keyboard and display is
>> nice.
>>
>> I guess it all comes down to what you like, what you can accept, and
>> what you
>> can't accept.. Everyone has their preferences.
>
>Quite true.
>
>I don't mean to be rude when I post this. Most of your complaints are
results of not
>having asked for help or suggestions when you encountered a problem. But I
suppose that
>is your loss; not mine.
Ditto.
Larry
Follow-Ups:
References: