HP 48GX vs 49G+
jbssm
I have bought a 49G+ and returned it because it was so lousy.
Then I have bough a beautiful completly new 48GX with black LCD, it
arrived yesterday.
But now I see that HP has fixed the problems with the 49G+, bummer.
What is your opinion, should I ressel my new never used 48GX and buy a
49G+, your do you steel feel that the 48GX kicks the 49G+ ?
Please post quick because I don't know how much time I can have this
packaged 48GX without playing with it. :)
Raul Lion
Raul L
Javier Marcelo
speed and more functions get a 49G+. It won't last as a 48GX, but
technically it's a better calc. Or do like I'm planning. Keep the 48GX and
buy a 49G+ :-)
"jbssm" <jb...@netcabo.pt> escribió en el mensaje
news:90700cb5.04022...@posting.google.com...
idan
I really cannot understand why people prefer the slow hp48gx to the
hp49g+ .
the hp48g cannot deal with symbolic matrix and its so slow when
operating the equation writer which is in my opinion the biggest
advantage of the hp calculator.
It does not simplify expressions fast and sometimes cannot integrate
expressions.
It's file manager is horrible.
Maybe the keyboard is better for dealing with simple numbers but
everyone I talked to just dont use the eqw writer in the 48 because
its so slow they can go to the moon and back until they will insert
the expression.
In my opinion - and moreover now that the keyboard is fixed (I hope -
I am myself waiting for my replacement to arrive...) - 49g+ !!! its
about more then a decade between the two calcs !! almost two decades.
Bye
Idan
Reth
do other things.
For example I have never needed: symbolic matrix, equation writer, file
manager, integration or differentiation. If I could I would permanently get
rid of CAS and algebraic mode. And I've been using HP calcs for 20 years now
on everyday basis as a surveyor. Right after I got and played a bit with the
HP49g+ I went and bought spare brand new HP48GX plus 2 RAM cards for it.
Cheers
"idan" <idan...@doal.co.il> wrote in message
news:b96fcd44.04022...@posting.google.com...
idan
As someone said here - it seems the the hp48g can serve for more years
because of its solidness but if you think about it again - many users
has broken their LCD screen because there is no protection. In fact -
that was the reason Hp added the screen cover in the first place - to
avoid screen smashing.
In my opinion - since you are new to Hp graphing calcs you haven't
tried already the eqw writer. If you don't know yet what it is so open
the manual and understand what it is used for.
I think the eqw writer is useful only if the calc works fast - hp49g+
will be a better decision.
The hp48 dont simplifies expressions very good. You have to press
EXPAND and COLLECT too many times until the expression is simplified.
The hp49g+ and hp49g has two modes : exact and approx. the hp48g has
only the approx mode. Because my english is not very good, I suggest
you to read about those modes too because if you are a student - exact
mode will help you a lot.
Sometimes people forget about this thing which actually proves the CAS
of the hp49g/g+. I think (not sure) that the hp48 CAS is more
premitive (if exists at all).
This is true that many programs were written to the 48 but it is about
to change - just open hpcalc.org and see how many programs were made
for the hp49g and most of them work on the g+. I remember that 4 years
ago people said that they dont think there will ever be as much
programs for the 49g...
During my studies I was studing with my girfriend. She had the hp48
and I used the hp49g. I cannot count the number of times My calc
solved integrals and symbolic expressions fast and correct.
Dont forget the memory issue - The hp48g has too little free memory.
If you are looking for a calc just to calculate simple calculations -
I wouldnt have chosen either 48 or 49. I would prefer much simple
calc.
But if you are looking for more mathematical capeabilities - after you
will get to learn the scheme of the 49g+ - you will love it.
But preper yourself to dislike the keys very much. I am sure that even
the new keyboard is not as good as the 48g is. But keyboard is not
everything in life....
Hope I helped.
Good luck
Idan
Helen
> I really cannot understand why people prefer the slow hp48gx to the
> hp49g+.
Because the 48GX has proven to be a reliable tool. The 49G+, on the
other hand, has so far proven to be the exact opposite.
> the hp48g cannot deal with symbolic matrix and its so slow when
> operating the equation writer which is in my opinion the biggest
> advantage of the hp calculator.
I simply cannot understand why I would want to use and equation
writer, fast or slow. In fact, I find it somewhat ironic that HP users
of all people, who are the ones that are touting the benefits of RPN
over algebraic input, are suddenly so ethusiastic about something like
that.
> It does not simplify expressions fast and sometimes cannot integrate
> expressions.
The 48G does not have a CAS, and does next to no symbolic math, yes.
So? Many people are not interested in symbolic math on a calculator.
And, if you want to do symbolic math, I would strongly recommend a
TI89 or Voyage 200, which feature a much more useable CAS than the HPs
do.
> It's file manager is horrible.
I don't need a file manager on a calculator.
> Maybe the keyboard is better for dealing with simple numbers but
> everyone I talked to just dont use the eqw writer in the 48 because
> its so slow they can go to the moon and back until they will insert
> the expression.
I don't use the equation writer because I see no need for it. I
wouldn't use it no matter how fast it is.
-- Helen.
Bhuvanesh
> the hp48g cannot deal with symbolic matrix and its so slow when
> operating the equation writer which is in my opinion the biggest
> advantage of the hp calculator.
TI calculators have had equation editors for years now. And, yes, our
EQWs handle units :P
> everyone I talked to just dont use the eqw writer in the 48 because
> its so slow they can go to the moon and back until they will insert
> the expression.
Hopefully the EQW on the HP49G+ is as fast as the EQW and Hail on the
68k. I had occasion to use a physical HP49G (not G+) once, and it took
forever to do anything. I know and appreciate that the designers tried
hard to make the HP EQW faster, but I think HP needed to finally dump
the Saturn and use modern hardware to make it usable.
--
Bhuvanesh
idan
As a student to structural engineering I am dealing many times with
very large and long expressions - and it is the same not only in
studies.
These expressions will be very hard to calculate with the RPN. I love
the RPN very much but for long expressions it is not very useful.
You forget that in the eqw writer you dont need to put brackets. By
the way - it is not the same for the hp48 - there you must put
brackets in some cases so its eqw writer isnt perfect as the hp49g"'s.
In my opinion The CAS in hp49g+ is very strong at least - strong
enough for my needs and it is very important in my opinion that a calc
will "think" mathematically.
As for surveying I also heard that people prefer the 48g.
But someone who dont use the CAS, dont do symbolic, dont use the eqw
writer, why spend so much money even on the 48g ?? go and by cheap RPN
calculator and thats it. You dont need such a powerfull tool. Its like
opening a nut with a KONGO driller...
I must say that I use the hp49g+ to isolate variables from an
equation. since the hp49g+ simplifies the expression which has been
isolated - I save a lot of time dealing with expressions.
I think file manager is very important to orgenize your variables and
files.
I agree that it is not the most imprtant thing but in hp48 it is just
TOO SLOW. just for view the files it takes so much time... the hp49g+
is very useful : you can move, copy, files easily and create a new
directory in a second.
Yes - I love the color of the 48 too. I think its a beautiful calc.
But I really dont see what is the fight about : The guy wants to buy a
calc.
Lets ask him for his needs. what does he expect the calc to do ?
Maybe the hp48g will be perfect for him ?
Maybe he just need a CASIO and end of story ?
Bye
Idan
Raul Lion
>
> I really cannot understand why people prefer the slow hp48gx to the
> hp49g+ .
> the hp48g cannot deal with symbolic matrix and its so slow when
> operating the equation writer which is in my opinion the biggest
> advantage of the hp calculator.
> It does not simplify expressions fast and sometimes cannot integrate
> expressions.
> It's file manager is horrible.
> Maybe the keyboard is better for dealing with simple numbers but
> everyone I talked to just dont use the eqw writer in the 48 because
> its so slow they can go to the moon and back until they will insert
> the expression.
>
Simbolic matrix, very fast eq writer, integrate, a good filer... *ALL*
the points you talk about are running in my 48GX thanks to Metakernel,
Erable, Alg48 (fathers of 49) and years of my own programs, my own
menu system, etc: that is because I prefer this calc to the new 49G+
As I said a few days ago, last summer I ran to buy a spare unit with
RAM cards.
When a new user ask me, I recomend him the 49G+, but I won't buy it
for me.
I hope you can know understand our point of view.
Raul L
Javier Marcelo
"Raul Lion" <pit...@yahoo.es> escribió en el mensaje
news:b1f5ba59.0402...@posting.google.com...
Totally agree. I need symbolic math, matrices, and integrals. I study civil
engineering. I use Erable and Java to add more power to the 48GX. There are
ultra fast replacements for the EQW for the 48GX too. I'm only complaining
about the reliability of the 49G+. If HP made a calc with the power of the
49G+ and the building quality of the 48GX I'd buy it without even thinking.
In the meantime, I'll keep my HP48GX with my ramcard and my programs. I'm
even thinking of adding another ramcard to install metakernel. With all
those programs, Metakernel, Erable and Alg48 the HP48 is no longer the old
48.
Javier Marcelo.
Helen
[Laughing...] That is fascinating, to hear an HP advocate complain
about how large expressions are "hard to calculate with the RPN". If a
TI advocate would dare to make the exact same statement in this group,
s/he would have been taken apart...
> I love
> the RPN very much but for long expressions it is not very useful.
If that is how you feel, I would strongly recommend you switch over to
a TI calculator. You should be right at home with their algebraic-only
input, as Bhivanesh said their eqw actually handles units (in contrast
to the new HPs), and the CAS is much more usable than the
idiosyncratic mess on the HPs.
> You forget that in the eqw writer you dont need to put brackets. By
> the way - it is not the same for the hp48 - there you must put
> brackets in some cases so its eqw writer isnt perfect as the hp49g"'s.
As I said, I don't need an eqw, and I don't need "brackets" in RPN,
either.
As for how "perfect" the eqw is, yes, it is dead-slow on the 48, but
at least it can deal with units...
> In my opinion The CAS in hp49g+ is very strong at least - strong
> enough for my needs and it is very important in my opinion that a calc
> will "think" mathematically.
Well, in my opinion, the only one who can think is the user,
hopefully... Good luck hoping for some "thought" from your calculator.
> As for surveying I also heard that people prefer the 48g.
> But someone who dont use the CAS, dont do symbolic, dont use the eqw
> writer, why spend so much money even on the 48g ?? go and by cheap RPN
> calculator and thats it. You dont need such a powerfull tool. Its like
> opening a nut with a KONGO driller...
Would you like to tell us what "cheap RPN calculator" we should use
instead? Let me ask you more bluntly: Do you have any idea at all what
you are talking about? There are lots and lots and lots of examples
that are hard enough to require a powerful calculator, yet do not
require any CA at all.
> I must say that I use the hp49g+ to isolate variables from an
> equation. since the hp49g+ simplifies the expression which has been
> isolated - I save a lot of time dealing with expressions.
Again, if you are into simplification, the TIs would suit you much
better. Try this: type "2 3 / 2 / 3 *". What do you get? Well, it's
"2/3/2*3". Wow. Impressive. A few keypresses later your HP might tell
you that this is "1". Had you used a TI for an equivalent exercise,
you would have gotten that result right away.
-- Helen.
Raul Lion
>... I'm even thinking of adding another ramcard to install metakernel.
Do you know klotz RAM cards?
b_paddington
> Again, if you are into simplification, the TIs would suit you much better.
> Try this: type "2 3 / 2 / 3 *". What do you get? Well, it's "2/3/2*3".
> Wow. Impressive. A few keypresses later your HP might tell you that this
> is "1". Had you used a TI for an equivalent exercise, you would have
> gotten that result right away.
>
> -- Helen.
Gee... *all* my HPs tell me this is 1.000E0 straight up....
And I have *a* *lot* of HP calculators.
Helen
> > Again, if you are into simplification, the TIs would suit you much better.
> > Try this: type "2 3 / 2 / 3 *". What do you get? Well, it's "2/3/2*3".
> > Wow. Impressive. A few keypresses later your HP might tell you that this
> > is "1". Had you used a TI for an equivalent exercise, you would have
> > gotten that result right away.
> >
> > -- Helen.
>
> Gee... *all* my HPs tell me this is 1.000E0 straight up....
Well, let's just say that it would have been beneficial if you had
tried to follow the conversation.
> And I have *a* *lot* of HP calculators.
O.k., let me know how many of these give you the result you quote
while using their CAS in "Exact" mode. I hope that will clear things
up for you.
-- Helen.
Chuck
Send me an email regarding the subject have information for you regarding
the 48GX and structural engineering programs.
CID...
Raul Lion
!!!!!!!!???????
idan
It seems there is a temporarely problem with my email written above.
my new email is: idan...@intermail.co.il
Thank you for your attention. You are invited to write me.
Idan
idan
I suppose you are refering to the "auto simplification" of the TI
calcs.
There is a program for the hp49g that do auto simplification.
And - you can laugh all day but In civil engineering and structural
engineering we are dealing with very very long expressions since the
expressions are sometimes empirical. I am sorry but dealing with these
expressions with RPN is just giving yourself a headache. EQW writer is
not algebric mode !!!! EQW made so that you could, after learning to
operate it quickly, write an expression very quickly, without any
mistakes, and edit it again very easily, replace variables quickly in
this expression, and all this - in real time - not as the TI does it -
after your had already input the expression - but in real time !!!
What can be more useful than that ? Its very same like using MAPLE
software or MATHLAB to input large expressions.
I am talking about very large expressions, with many many variables.
Sometimes I use the SOLVER to solve these expressions and there is no
easier way than to write the expression in the eqw writer and than -
solve it.
Why mess with RPN all the time ?
I suggest you to try and start using eqw writer. After a while you get
used to it you won't use RPN for large expressions. Just try it. To
use RPN very efficiently you need to know RPN very very well and rule
all the commands. Are you one of these ? If you are - lucky you. If
not - EQW is a better choice.
And you all the time insist that TI calc has a better CAS - Are you
familier with the fact that even experts in the field dont know that
answer to this question ? There are many developers that think that in
many areas the hp49g beats without a fight. So why are you so sure
about this subject ?
See Ya
Idan
Javier Marcelo
problems with these cards?. Just having them without a cover seems a little
strange. If you own one, plase, tell me something about them. Thank you very
much.
Javier Marcelo
"Raul Lion" <pit...@yahoo.es> escribió en el mensaje
news:b1f5ba59.04022...@posting.google.com...
William R. Platt
> Dear Helen !
<SNIP>
> Why mess with RPN all the time ?
> I suggest you to try and start using eqw writer. After a while you get
> used to it you won't use RPN for large expressions. Just try it. To
> use RPN very efficiently you need to know RPN very very well and rule
> all the commands. Are you one of these ? If you are - lucky you. If
> not - EQW is a better choice.
<SNIP>
> Idan
Hi Idan, I have been following this repartee with some interest---may I ask
you how long you have used "HP's" and what your first HP was? I rather
suspect that you started with one of these "big guns" (e.g. hp49) and that
you cut your teeth on a casio or something before it? If this is the case,
it should be understood that there are many persons in their 30's and older
who "cut their teeth" on the 11c, 41c, 34c, 12c, 32s etc and for them,
knowing all the RPN commands "very well" goes without saying. And in such
a case, moving through a large expression in RPN is very smooth and natural.
But the real issue here may be "direct computation" vs.
"enter-view-edit-use". RPN is excellent for direct computation, but a bit
obtuse to edit or view (though for the very experienced it is quite
natural). It sounds like you are more of the "enter-view-edit-use" paradigm
type user. RPN is incredibly versatile for direct computation, and for
programming, where the keystrokes in the program are a perfect match to
doing the problem by hand. Of course, sometimes you need to use Horner's
Method etc to re-arrange the expression for faster and safer computation.
From your description of activities in your last post, you treat your HP49g+
more like a PC platform than a calculator---you are "stretching" your
calculator to the very edge of its capabilities. I suspect that you might
actually be far better off moving past the calculator and into a
sub-laptop---as then you CAN have MAPLE or other super-whizbang program
there.
In my engineering work, once I have a real problem to solve that will go
into a report, or be part of an official calculation, or that involves a lot
of number crunching, I tend to lean towards using a computer, even if it is
Excel or Mathcad, or a powerful special purpose program.
I use the calculators for initial thinking--for hashing out the way the
problem works---or should I say more accurately that while I am hashing out
the problem, I use the calculator to rapidly perform tedious numerical
computations. But once I see what is happening--have played with the
problem "by hand" as it were, I move up a notch.
Of course there are some jobs I come across that are so "one-off" that
everything stays on paper--and so the calculator remains the principal
computing aid. But this is now the exception rather than the rule.
I must say that for me, most of the power and use of the HP's is really the
RPN good quality interface, programmability and memory--making it possible
to very quickly customize for a repetitive computation with essentially no
extra "overhead" development time.
All the fancy whiz-bang CAS etc seems rather ridiculous to me compared to
using a computer.
William R. Platt
Klotz and they have been just fine for 6 months now.
But I do not trust any cards for real permanent back-up (use a cable to a PC
for that).
Funny thing is, I really haven't needed these cards yet. (I don't write
huge programs very often). Bought them so that I would have a complete GX
system before it became too late!
-Bill Platt
"Javier Marcelo" <gorb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c1d0pu$1hgt0n$1...@ID-219070.news.uni-berlin.de...
Anthony Garcia
"William R. Platt" <wpl...@takeouthormelplattdesign.org> wrote in message
news:__6dne3IFoO...@thebiz.net...
>
> "idan" <idan...@doal.co.il> wrote in message
> news:b96fcd44.0402...@posting.google.com...
> > Dear Helen !
> <SNIP>
>
You beat me to it ...
Many here have used HP calculators for years ... my introduction came when
I saw a friend with an HP41C years ago. Now I skipped a bit and owned an
HP15C, HP28S and am on my second HP48GX. As a side note I also own and
frequently use a pocket Casio (don't know the model but it's algebraic and
cost ~$9.00 eight years ago) and sometimes one of my wife's classroom
(she's a 4th grade teacher) TI solar calculators in the cheap blue case.
They all work for me.
I agree with William Platt in that what you appear to be doing is
"enter-view-edit-use" and in as much as that is your interest I suppose it
is perfectly valid. However if you're a structural engineer and you are
truely solving serious problems you will either be using dedicated PC
software or you will use something a bit more industrial in strength than
your HP.
As examples I use Excel for many refrigeration and psychrometric
calculations and for stress analysis I use my HP for simple first-order
calculations (usually with no program) and FEA for more involved second
and higher-order calculation.
Only on occasion (read once or twice ever in 12 years) have I ever
'needed' a CAS and then I used Maple. The bottom line is that as a
student you will probably work your calculator much harder than you ever
will in professional life.
When I need to perform algebra, that's what I do and I don't do it on any
calculator. When I have an equation and need to solve for a variable I
"sometimes" do it on my HP but I only solve it numerically. More often I
solve numerically on Excel. Only rarely would I ever need to solve
symbolically therfore a CAS on a calculator is generally of little use.
HOWEVER, that being said, when I have too much time on my hands I'm not
above working and tweaking out my calculator with programs that probably
would make better spreadsheets. To this end I've created a series of
programs for calculating material useage and flat patterns for sheet metal
work, financial calculations, table look-ups and interpolations.
Important however is that for serious industrial strength problems, use
the calculator to get the feel for the problem then model/solve the
problem on you computer.
Raul Lion
> Thanks Raul. I knew about Klotz, and probably that's what I'll buy. Any
> problems with these cards?. Just having them without a cover seems a little
> strange. If you own one, plase, tell me something about them. Thank you very
> much.
> Javier Marcelo
They work properly: no problems for years, but battery life is just a year.
I give you more details by e-mail (in spanish!)
regards
Raul L
Helen
> What can be more useful than that ? Its very same like using MAPLE
Have you ever used any of these? Operating them has no similarities
whatsoever to using eqw.
> I am talking about very large expressions, with many many variables.
What does that mean? In my book, the above would mean that these
expressions are unsuitable for a calculator anyway: You would never be
able to see such expressions in their entirety on that little
calculator screen. If, in fact, you are dealing with large expressions
with a non-trivial structure, you should work with them on a real CAS.
If, however, the structure of your expressions is simple, as I
suspect, there is no need for eqw. As others have remarked before, you
are using the wrong tool for your purpose.
But of course, I understand that "if the only tool you have is a
hammer, then everything looks like a nail"...
> Why mess with RPN all the time ?
Because it is easy and fast? Because it is well suited for the kinds
of problems that are appropriate for treatment on a calculator?
> I suggest you to try and start using eqw writer.
You know, your main problem seems to be that you are unable to grasp
the fact that other people have different kinds of problems to solve,
and use a different approach to solve them, than you do. As I said, I
have tried eqw, and found it useless for anything I would be
interested in doing on a calculator.
> And you all the time insist that TI calc has a better CAS
You need to read more closely. The above is _not_ what I am saying.
What I am saying is that according to your description of how _you_
use your calculator, a TI clearly would be a much better choice. It
has a much better display for representing "large" expressions, and it
nicely performs automatic simplifications. Since that is all you seem
to be interested in, these machines would be ideal for you. You should
really try them, imo.
Otherwise, some others have answered your points in a bit more detail,
and you would do well to read their responses. For me this discussion
is closed.
-- Helen.
idan
Hi all !
Why I have the impression that women are much more aggressive when
responding than the guys here.The guys here gave me detailed answers,
with good manners, and really wanted to help instead of fighting...
You can make your point very clearly, Helen, without being aggressive.
I am sure I have a lot to learn from you. I have not been aggressive
to you.
well, as I mentioned already, I am a student and since leptop is not
allowed in tests - the hp with a CAS is very useful when dealing with
symbolic and matrix and integration. And I have used all of these
functions.
Yes, my hp49g was my first hp and I used it for 4 years. Now I
switched to the hp49g+. I am now waiting for my replacement with hp,
hoping to get a better keyboard than the noisy, unregistering thing I
had in the old unit.
Of course I use PC. I use STRAP (Structure Analysis Program) and Excel
and what I meant by saying that the hp is similar to the MAPLE is the
graphic interface is similar and that the hp49g is more closer in its
interface to a pc than to a calc. (paste, cut, all the "signing
scheme"...)
I rarely use analysis programs on my hp because STRAP is more friendly
but when I need a fast analysis to a simple structureI use VIGA on
the hp.
I dont agree that large expressions cannot be seen very well on the
hp. I think that its quite stisfying for me. As a student we are using
very large expressions which sometimes solved numerically and the hp
gives me a great advantage over other students. For example, when
calculating geometrical size of a footing (isolated shoes) with Hensen
method. Or when dealing with dynamic analysis of structures, we use
matrices, or when analysing buckling it is better be solved
symbolically. Or when dealing with fluids and hydrology - instead of
using "try and miss" I use a simple program which use the solver and
cleans afterwards the variables. sometimes I need to draw graphs in
order to get an answer and the hp49g+ is very very fast.
Dont forget, I am a student !!! not like you guys.
Of course, all the examples I gave, are more often as a student and
not in general use as an engineer. But for a student, who wants to
throw away his integrals tables or have to go to the books in order to
fresh memory about matrix operations - the hp will help a lot.
Bottom line : I want to learn RPN more deeply. I dont use ALG mode of
course and never used it. I combine the eqw writer and RPN. Of course
it is very easy to write programs in RPN, it is just that if I get a
large expression - starting dealing with it with SWAP,DUP, and all the
others seems to me, a bit annoying.
P.S The discussion can be closed if you wish.
Thank you all
Bye
Idan
Veli-Pekka Nousiainen
> If you want reliability guaranteed for years, buy a 48GX. If you want more
You mean like loosing the functionality of the shift functions
and the [ON] key after a while (10 years)
Nobady knows yet how long the 49g+'s will last.
> speed and more functions get a 49G+. It won't last as a 48GX, but
> technically it's a better calc. Or do like I'm planning. Keep the 48GX and
> buy a 49G+ :-)
I understand the choise of the 48GX over the old 49G,
but the new 49g+ wins hands down in speed and versatility
IrDA and USB at 115,200 plus SD, about 3.5 * truth plotting speed
twice as fast in numerical computing using floats and almost 8
times speed in CG kernel (written in ARM9 ASM)
Now that we are quickly discovering the ARM9 availability
the speed improvements will go beyound conventional
Saturn ASM and even the emulated Saturn is ususally over 12MHz
compared to the old 4MHz (or 48S 2MHz) Saturn.
[VPN] - opinions only, facts are slightly inaccurate
Veli-Pekka Nousiainen
news:1a8f5fe5.04022...@posting.google.com...
> idan...@doal.co.il (idan) wrote in message
news:<b96fcd44.04022...@posting.google.com>...
> > I really cannot understand why people prefer the slow hp48gx to the
> > hp49g+.
>
> Because the 48GX has proven to be a reliable tool. The 49G+, on the
> other hand, has so far proven to be the exact opposite.
All my HP 48GX (three so far) have lost their [ON] key functionality
Two of them also the shift keys. If you have to compare, do it against
a real calculator: the HP-41CX. It still works!
X
> TI89 or Voyage 200, which feature a much more useable CAS than the HPs
> do.
That is a fact or an opinion?
> > It's file manager is horrible.
>
> I don't need a file manager on a calculator.
BUT I DO and so do many others.
At least with a huge non-volative Flash memory it's nice to have
a filer (I use Filer6 on my 49g+)
> > Maybe the keyboard is better for dealing with simple numbers but
> > everyone I talked to just dont use the eqw writer in the 48 because
> > its so slow they can go to the moon and back until they will insert
> > the expression.
>
> I don't use the equation writer because I see no need for it. I
> wouldn't use it no matter how fast it is.
Also the programs run faster on a 49g+
My 48 and old 49 are used only occationally
now that the speed of ARM9 is here.
[VPN]
Veli-Pekka Nousiainen
How do you know?
You don't need CAS and EQW anyway, right?
[VPN]
Veli-Pekka Nousiainen
> GHMoh...@yahoo.com (Helen) wrote in message
>
> Hi all !
>
> Why I have the impression that women are much more aggressive when
> responding than the guys here.The guys here gave me detailed answers,
> with good manners, and really wanted to help instead of fighting...
> You can make your point very clearly, Helen, without being aggressive.
> I am sure I have a lot to learn from you. I have not been aggressive
> to you.
but to provoke endless fights of what is better etc ad nauseaum
the worst thing is that I'm as inmature and go for it every time...
(-;
[VPN] - not referring to "idan" at all !
Veli-Pekka Nousiainen
news:662e00ed.04022...@posting.google.com...
> idan...@doal.co.il (idan) wrote:
> > the hp48g cannot deal with symbolic matrix and its so slow when
> > operating the equation writer which is in my opinion the biggest
> > advantage of the hp calculator.
>
> TI calculators have had equation editors for years now. And, yes, our
> EQWs handle units :P
Hi, Bhuv!
Can it solve with units?
Can it mix units with same SI base, but different units (in, cm)
while solving for...say...cubic-nano-lightyears
Can it Integrate using units as limits?
Can it handle complex number in polar form using units, like:
(5.2_V <) 56.67_o)
[which even the 48 can't do]
and then solve only the angle part in a linear equation using
the comlex_polar_form_units like above?
If yes, I...ZZZAAAApppp....