64 bit Windows driver.
JAM
7 64 bit that will allov HP Connect recognize calculator ?
JAM
JAM
Forgot to mention. I'm talking about HP50g calculator.
JAM
John H Meyers
> Is there an unofficial or official USB driver for Windows 7
> 64 bit that will allow HP Connect to recognize HP50G/49G+ ?
One is lucky to get any 64-bit driver for anything so old.
However, an SD card may save the day (and is much less bulky than a cable).
If your computer didn't come with built-in card slots,
there are USB plug-ins for them (there seems to be a USB plug-in
for everything but an electric shaver :)
No, I spoke too soon:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0028Y4DIG
[r->] [OFF]
JAM
> On Mon, 09 Nov 2009 11:12:02 -0600, JAM wrote:
> > Is there an unofficial or official USB driver for Windows 7
> > 64 bit that will allow HP Connect to recognize HP50G/49G+ ?
>
> One is lucky to get any 64-bit driver for anything so old.
John
This is still their top of the line calculator and it was not that old
when Vista come out. But I was wondering if some frustrated,
knowledgeable user maybe wrote USB 64 bit driver himself instead of
waiting for HP forever to support it.
> However, an SD card may save the day (and is much less bulky than a cable).
That might work. Thanks for advice.
> If your computer didn't come with built-in card slots,
> there are USB plug-ins for them (there seems to be a USB plug-in
> for everything but an electric shaver :)
>
> No, I spoke too soon:http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0028Y4DIG
LOL
>
> [r->] [OFF]
JAM
John H Meyers
> it was not that old when Vista came out.
It is older than it appears,
because the HP50G might still have been called HP49G+,
were it not for the very soiled reputation of that model name,
for several years of keyboard failures and bad customer service,
so it basically got a "name lift" and new colors
(plus a serial port which had no cable to match,
and somehow managing to require one more battery),
and lo, it became the HP50G!
(with no change to even the name of the old driver,
just a little new "skinning" of connection kit
to add "50G" somewhere, also on new cover pages of manuals :)
> But I was wondering if some frustrated, knowledgeable user
> maybe wrote USB 64 bit driver himself instead of
> waiting for HP forever to support it.
Does anyone have a list of user-written Windows drivers?
Perhaps that's why "System Restore" was invented :)
> This is still their top of the line calculator
Some might say that a descent began much longer ago,
and ended in what you can get today -- better in programmability,
internal functions, MK, CAS, developments like flash and SD,
but no match in various other qualities.
Great improvement over 49G+ first two "generations" (of keyboards),
which by the 3rd generation of 49G+ were already the same as 50G.
[r->] [OFF]
TW
> 7 64 bit that will allov HP Connect recognize calculator ?
Send me an email at timwessman at_gmail_com
I sent you a notice earlier but you didn't get it/didn't reply.
TW
data...@gmail.com
There is another option:
Get a serial cable + USB to serial and use Kermit. Works great on any
OS for 48/49/50.
Joel Koltner
news:op.u26rd...@miu.edu...
> (plus a serial port which had no cable to match,
...and a somewhat buggy implementation...
> and somehow managing to require one more battery),
...because some bright guy decided he could say a few DIMES by taking out the
switching power regulator and using a linear power regulator instead. Of
course, the fact that this would cause the end-user to spend many DOLLARS more
on batteries over the life of the device (due to the lower efficiency of a
linear regulator) didn't concern him; he probably received some bonus for cost
reduction. :-(
> Some might say that a descent began much longer ago,
> and ended in what you can get today -- better in programmability,
> internal functions, MK, CAS, developments like flash and SD,
> but no match in various other qualities.
What you see today is much more "purpose-built" devices aimed at the average
middle schooler, then the average high schooler, and finally the average
college kid (and the math classes they're taking) rather than "general-purpose
computing devices" that required the end-user to be a bit more creative in
figuring out how to apply the device to solve his own problems. I find it a
bit ironic that high-end Casio calculators have now just gotten back to having
a full-fledged, BASIC-like programming language... like they had back in the
late '80s/early '90s and then abandoned for over a decade!
---Joel
Eric Rechlin
> ...because some bright guy decided he could say a few DIMES by taking out
> the switching power regulator and using a linear power regulator instead.
> Of course, the fact that this would cause the end-user to spend many
> DOLLARS more on batteries over the life of the device (due to the lower
> efficiency of a linear regulator) didn't concern him; he probably received
> some bonus for cost reduction. :-(
Unfortunately it's a bit more complicated than it originally appeared.
There are several voltage planes on the calculator (I think 3.3 and 1.8 and
something else), and as I recall the voltage regulators are cascaded. I
seem to recall thinking that the third voltage plane didn't make much sense,
but I can't remember why -- it has been a year since I thought about this.
A friend of mine replaced one of the regulators with a switching regulator
(in small quantities they cost several dollars, but perhaps in HP's
quantities they are a lot cheaper), and that cut power consumption by
something like 20-30 percent. Then he replaced another one and power
consumption went up, though it's entirely possible we screwed something up
in the process (I know I damaged one of the pads when desoldering one of the
regulators).
Without specs on what regulators were used from the factory (we couldn't
really identify the stock regulators) it was hard to find out what to
replace them with. Perhaps we guessed wrong. If schematics and a parts
list were provided it would probably be possible to figure out what exactly
needs to be changed, but as it is now, trying to replace those regulators
isn't very feasible. I'm sure that with the right parts we could do a lot
better than the 20-30% listed above, but it may not be worth the effort of
the labor to install them, especially when you can just run off of USB power
most of the time.
Regards,
Eric Rechlin
Joel Koltner
news:7ltv8fF...@mid.individual.net...
> Unfortunately it's a bit more complicated than it originally appeared.
OK, but from what you've written, it still sounds like me like the kind of
engineers at the "old HP" (Corvallis) would have definitely stuck with 3
batteries and a switcher and not the 4 battery/linear regulator scheme! If
you figure that people might replace the batteries even just 10 times over the
life of the device, having to do so only 7 or 8 times (20-30% savings) adds up
to more savings than the extra cost of the switching regulators.
> I'm sure that with the right parts we could do a lot better than the 20-30%
> listed above, but it may not be worth the effort of the labor to install
> them, especially when you can just run off of USB power most of the time.
Agreed, it's not really a huge amount of money for an individual one way or
the other, it's really just a sign of how HP has fallen after the
Carly-inspired split, which is sad.
---Joel
John H Meyers
> From what you've written, it still sounds like me like the kind of
> engineers at the "old HP" (Corvallis) would have definitely stuck with 3
> batteries and a switcher and not the 4 battery/linear regulator scheme! If
> you figure that people might replace the batteries even just 10 times over the
> life of the device, having to do so only 7 or 8 times (20-30% savings) adds up
> to more savings than the extra cost of the switching regulators.
The main thing that increased "miles per gallon,"
in the automobile industry, was legislation,
so that it was no longer optional,
including that the buyers themselves could not opt
for cheaper engineering of less efficient cars
("on average," but that's another story)
In some places, particularly where there used to be more isolation,
local cultural appreciations also served to maintain quality.
Manufacturers are not solely responsible for cutting corners
to make cheaper goods, as it is not entirely possible
to maintain high standards, in the face of non-appreciative consumers,
who do not themselves realize that it may cost them more, in the end,
so they will not buy the ultimately better product,
and may even sacrifice their own livelihood by not supporting
a potentially better industrial/political landscape e.g.:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/walmart/
The same extends into social and environmental matters,
where lack of awareness and foresight (of everyone,
not just those merely currently voting in legislatures,
who tend to reflect popular opinions, even if based on apathy)
may end in tragedy, for those still here.
--
JAM
> It is older than it appears,
> because the HP50G might still have been called HP49G+,
> ...
John.
Agreed, but it is still their best. You can say the same about TI89.
It is just a facelift / upgrade of the old TI92. But TI did managed to
upgrade their TIConnect software with a patch that works on Windows 7
64 bit. It is just a matter of treating your customer with respect. HP
is still selling HP50g to students. How many students these days will
get their college laptop with XP ? In the past it was typical for
manufacturer to abandon only old hardware that was long gone from the
market, but they usually supported everything they were selling with
upgrades to the drivers. Especialy big corporations with respecatble
names like HP used to support their products. I'm not a professional
programmer, but I doubt it would take much effort to converting
existing 32 bit USB driver to 64 bit. Current 32 bit driver does work
on 32 bit Windows 7. I have already tested it. So it is just a matter
of converting it with some testing for reliability.
>
> [r->] [OFF]
Jack
Philip J. Fry
>> because the HP50G might still have been called HP49G+,
Does not this mean that hp is abandoning graphing calculator business?
The flagship model is now more than 6 years old. If they still sell such
an old model then they obviously have no intention to develop a new one.
Fry
data...@gmail.com
> On Nov 10, 10:45 am, "John H Meyers" <jhmey...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>
> > It is older than it appears,
> > because the HP50G might still have been called HP49G+,
> > ...
>
> John.
>
> Agreed, but it is still their best. You can say the same about TI89.
> It is just a facelift / upgrade of the old TI92. But TI did managed to
> upgrade their TIConnect software with a patch that works on Windows 7
> 64 bit. It is just a matter of treating your customer with respect. HP
> is still selling HP50g to students. How many students these days will
> get their college laptop with XP ?
A better question would have been how many college student will use
Windows?
My kid just started NYU as a freshmen. Every kid on her dorm room
floor has a Mac. As I surveyed coffee shops and the library I
estimated about 2/3 of the students had Macs.
So where is the official 50g support for the Mac? I already know
about http://hpconnect.sourceforge.net, which is grand, but some have
had no luck with it. There is nothing in the documentation for Mac
support and nothing on HP's site.
BTW, I also noticed a lot of TIs and no HPs on campus. Perhaps there
is nothing to worry about. :-)
Joel Koltner
news:32949541-2785-4b42...@f20g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
"A better question would have been how many college student will use
Windows?"
It varies a lot by the particular college... business and engineering majors
are still predominantly Windows, whereas teaching and arts are largely Macs.
And of course there are a few brave souls who go with Linux! :-)
"BTW, I also noticed a lot of TIs and no HPs on campus. Perhaps there
is nothing to worry about. :-)"
Yeah, HP has largely given up the educational market to TI. A decent number
of engineering students still seem to appreciate them, though.
elturco
Who didn´t have problems with Windows OS, remember changing from 95 to
98, Millenium, 2000, Xp, Xp 64, Vista, Vista 64, and now 7, so at
least for me this happened 5 times (last was Vista 64) and not only
with HP calculators, when the PC is used for professional applications
we are talking about much more money than a calc costs, it sounds
funny but even progs like autocad2009 (U$S5000) don´t work like they
should, there are 16 bit applications that must have been replaced by
the users, if you can manage 10g or more memory with 4 processors why
can´t run a 16 bit cheap program?. The antivirus runs like an F1 but I
can´t connect a gps of U$S 10000 because I don´t have drivers.
This remembers me a Simpsons episode where an F14 can´t catch a Wright
brothers prototype because it is too slow.
So now I have a brand new computer, and of course the first thing I
bought was the PCI to Serial card adapter that didn´t work with
Vista64 so I must change to USB to Serial cable adapter that didn´t
work with all devices, solution: Windows XP and USB to Serial cable
adapter, 64 bit applications were totally sacrificed for the
moment....
JAM
> On Nov 11, 7:05 am, JAM <ja_1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 10, 10:45 am, "John H Meyers" <jhmey...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>
> > > It is older than it appears,
> > > because the HP50G might still have been called HP49G+,
> > > ...
>
> > John.
>
> > Agreed, but it is still their best. You can say the same about TI89.
> > It is just a facelift / upgrade of the old TI92. But TI did managed to
> > upgrade their TIConnect software with a patch that works on Windows 7
> > 64 bit. It is just a matter of treating your customer with respect. HP
> > is still selling HP50g to students. How many students these days will
> > get their college laptop with XP ?
>
> A better question would have been how many college student will use
> Windows?
>
> My kid just started NYU as a freshmen. Every kid on her dorm room
> floor has a Mac. As I surveyed coffee shops and the library I
> estimated about 2/3 of the students had Macs.
>
> So where is the official 50g support for the Mac? I already know
> had no luck with it. There is nothing in the documentation for Mac
> support and nothing on HP's site.
>
> BTW, I also noticed a lot of TIs and no HPs on campus. Perhaps there
> is nothing to worry about. :-)
I know Macs are in fashion especially for art students who do not need
HP50g in general. It is not very smart however for engineering
students to use Macs. Sure they can do it. Young people do a lot of
stupid things just to be "different". I know a student who bought his
shiny 13' underpowered Mac just to end up running it constantly in
Windows mode for all his studies related software. The fact is that
most of their future work related software will not work on Macs but
on Windows. Industrial CAD, CAE and numerous engineering applications
are 99% Windows these days. All the big manufacturing corporations are
100% Windows. Microsfot Office is dominant for engineering companies.
It is just a fact of life. Corporations will never invest in Macs.
They lack software and their cost cannot be sanely justified. Plus
Macs are so Holywood. C'mon man, grow up :-)
JAM
Michael J. Schülke
> I know Macs are in fashion especially for art students who do not need
> HP50g in general. It is not very smart however for engineering
> students to use Macs.
As a physicist, I don't profess to know much about engineers or
engineering students. I do know, however, that computer scientists and
and (computational) physicists were among the first to switch when OS X
came out, generally to cries of "Finally, a UNIX with a decent
desktop"...
Regards,
Michael
data...@gmail.com
Same here. I work in high performance computing. Most of my
government and university customers all of which are physicists,
mathematicians, chemists, engineers, etc... mostly use OS/X. None use
calculators.
JAM
Micheal
To be fair, in the past most engineering applications were run on
Unix. CAD, CAE, you name it. However Office was practically always
Microsoft since I remember (last 20 years or so). It created a
situation that many engineers were running two computers - Unix
workstation for engineering applications and Windows desktop or
recently laptop for office communication etc. This put pressure on
software companies to rewrite it's software in Windows. Now almost
every modern application in CAE od CAD is Windows based any many of
those companies are abandoning or completely abandoned Unix. Fact is
Mac or any other operating system will never have in many yeas in the
future anywhere near in quantity and quality of available software as
Windows based machines are enjoying. That is Why Mac was forced
finally to dual boot into Windows not the other way around :-)
JAM
Raymond Wiker
You're plain wrong, or at least several years out of date...
The situation now is that many people have a Windows PC for
work, which they only use because that is what they get given for
work. Meanwhile, at home, they use Macs.
Office is not a good reason for using a PC at home, and given
that you can actually get good, free alternatives, it is not even a
reason for using Windows for work purposes.
Further, many of the companies that switched from Unix to
Windows are now looking at Mac OS X and Linux; either for better
stability and performance, better security or simply for cost reasons.
A.L.
wrote:
>
>
> Further, many of the companies that switched from Unix to
>Windows are now looking at Mac OS X and Linux; either for better
>stability and performance, better security or simply for cost reasons.
Really?...
A.L.
Eric Rechlin
> As I surveyed coffee shops and the library I
> estimated about 2/3 of the students had Macs.
That's because once you pay the Apple tax to buy a Mac, you have no money
left over for Internet access, so you have to go to coffee shops and
libraries to use their free Internet access. :)
The truth is, for most people computers are interchangeable as applications
no longer matter to them, so they can use any operating system (Windows,
Macintosh, Linux, etc) equally well. As long as they can bring up a web
browser (email included) and have applications for typing stuff and
listening to music and organizing photos, they can do anything they care
about. And even these last three categories are making their way to the
web, becoming platform independent as well (Google Docs, Flickr/Picassa,
Pandora, etc).
We're even seeing this more with hardware, too, as more products adopt
standard interfaces. So many devices these days don't even need a special
driver -- plug in your USB flash drive, your digital camera, your phone, or
any number of other devices, and it Just Works. All can be treated as
generic USB mass storage devices for easy drag-and-drop of files on any
modern OS.
If only the HP 50g worked this way -- can you imagine how much more friendly
it would be if you plugged in your calculator and saw two more drives show
up -- "SD Card Reader" and "Flash Drive" -- to let you copy data to and from
your calculator using any computer with no special drivers?
The 50g would also work well without special drivers if it implemented its
USB with a standard USB to serial interface. Many standard USB to serial
adapters, such as those based on the FTDI chips, are totally "plug and play"
on every computer I have tried (Windows XP and Vista and modern versions of
Linux) with no special drivers needed. But then it would show up as a
serial device (just like the old HP 48!) rather than a mass storage device,
which may or may not be as useful
Microsoft temporarily dropped support for legacy (16-bit) software with
64-bit Windows, but I believe that is back now with Windows 7's built-in
seamless virtualization. This was presumably after an outcry by business
users who still needed to use software that was >15 years old and no longer
ran on Vista (the first widely-available 64-bit Microsoft OS). On the other
hand, because of Apple's target market (mostly those people I refer to in
the previous paragraph), they can get away with dropping support for legacy
applications every 5 years or so and nobody cares.
I still do too much stuff that I need a real computer for, which is why I
run Windows, but I know that for most people's needs, they can sit down in
front of any computer, no matter what the platform, and be equally
productive given a web browser and a couple basic applications.
Regards,
Eric Rechlin
Philip J. Fry
dislike these kind of stories.
Fry
John H Meyers
> As a physicist, I don't profess to know much about engineers or
> engineering students. I do know, however, that computer scientists and
> and (computational) physicists were among the first to switch
> when OS X came out, generally to cries of
> "Finally, a UNIX with a decent desktop"...
Got Cygwin?
Cygwin is like Linux, running within... Windows!
Free.
[r->] [OFF]
Raymond Wiker
Yes.
There are examples of large companies and government bodies
replacing their Windows PCs with Linux or Mac OS X, and they have been
pretty open-hearted about why.
JAM
> JAM <ja_1...@yahoo.com> writes:
> You're plain wrong, or at least several years out of date...
>
> The situation now is that many people have a Windows PC for
> work, which they only use because that is what they get given for
> work. Meanwhile, at home, they use Macs.
I agree. If you do nothing important at home, then Mac is probably
sufficient. It's fashionable, looks great on the desk and makes you
feel like you belong to elite. Those of us, however, who still use
adavnced software at home must use computers that can run it. And that
is only Windows these days.
> Office is not a good reason for using a PC at home, and given
> that you can actually get good, free alternatives, it is not even a
> reason for using Windows for work purposes.
Of course it is. Once Office is used at work it makes zero sense to
make yourself incompatible with Office documents created at work.
There are no good alternatives for MS Office. There are cheap ersatz
that can do some of the functionality that is within the MS Office.
For a light users that maybe sufficient, but for those, who need more
advanced functionality, "replacements" do not come even close. Take
for example Excel. Where is a replacement for MS Excel that is
programmable as easily as Microsoft product is ?
But even if Office is not enough, please, find me good RAD for Macs
like MS Visual Studio or Embarcadero RAD studio.
Where is NX or Catia for Mac ? Have you seen Nastran, Adams or
HyperMesh that runs great on Mac ? I have seen NX for Unix. it is a
stripped version of Windows original that lacks number of functions. I
suspect that this is probably a case in a number of applications. NX
in the past was designed to run on UInix but for many years recently
it is strictly Windows with some afterthought for those who still run
Unix.
The simple rule is, whatever is available for Macs, is also available
for Windows in either same or much better quality (functionality) and
for less cost. The opposite if however not true. Simple fact of life
is that mumber of applications and hardware pieces available for
Windows is not available for other systems or are available with
reduced functionality and in most cases at a higher price.
> Further, many of the companies that switched from Unix to
> Windows are now looking at Mac OS X and Linux; either for better
> stability and performance, better security or simply for cost reasons.- Hide quoted text -
Name one big company that does this.
> - Show quoted text -
JAM
John H Meyers
Hmm.. must be Jacek!
How's things in automobile engineering?
My own auto wasn't engineered to last too long,
that's all I know -- perhaps it was designed using Macs?
Actually, the fact that everything breaks down at once
may indicate greater comprehensive engineering than I have credited :)
-[ ]-
TW
> when Vista come out. But I was wondering if some frustrated,
> knowledgeable user maybe wrote USB 64 bit driver himself instead of
> waiting for HP forever to support it.
Bringing the topic back to the original topic. . .
http://www.hpcalc.org/details.php?id=7168
Now back to the off topic discussion:
I run a Mac for all my development needs. Why? I like the flexibility
of unix, but I don't want to dick around with making things work.
Using OSX I get the best of having great OSS and command line tools,
as well as all the proprietary stuff like MS Office and the Adobe
Suite. I also spend lots of time in VMware using things like Visual
studio, ProE, Solidworks and doing lots of software testing. The
ability to setup multiple operating systems and quickly revert back is
a great improvement for the type of stuff I do.
Granted, all of that could be done on a windows computer as well.
However, since switching over 1.5 years ago I have had far less day to
day frustrations than I ever had in windows land. Windows 7 is
acceptable to me and I would go with that if I had to, but I still
have fewer annoyances that tick me off with OSX and I am more
productive because of it.
TW
data...@gmail.com
> no longer matter to them, so they can use any operating system (Windows,
> Macintosh, Linux, etc) equally well. As long as they can bring up a web
> browser (email included) and have applications for typing stuff and
> listening to music and organizing photos, they can do anything they care
> about. And even these last three categories are making their way to the
> web, becoming platform independent as well (Google Docs, Flickr/Picassa,
> Pandora, etc).
This is why I was able to switch. Originally an Apple ][, then Mac
guy, I was sucked into the wonderful world of UNIX, then Linux and
built my career around that. When I started at my current employer 13
years ago I was issued a Windows laptop. I didn't really care, it was
used for email, internal apps, presentations, etc... IOW an office
tool. Although my employer (largest 3 letter computer company)
introduced Linux as an official workstation platform I defended my use
of Windows to my Linux peers because Windows made me more productive
(mostly for MS Office, and I did not want my workstation to be a
hobby).
That all changed when OS X became available, and MS Office for OS X
became available, and my employer support of the use of OS X. In 2008
I'd had enough of Windows crashes and poor performance due to all the
warez needed to keep a Windows platform safe--productivity was
slipping. I transitioned all my personal data to web-based services
so that I could switch to Linux or OS X without issue.
I tested Linux and OS X side by side. The choice was clear. Linux on
my T61 was still a hobby. OS X had MS Office, proper power management
without hassle, two Visio replacements (both can R/W Visio files) and
I could still give my PPT presentations and share data with Windows
users. And its UNIX, and runs all Linux apps (macports.org). After
my one year survey I was right to switch to OS X. My Linux peers are
switching as well.
CAD, CAE, etc... software will NOT drive the adoption of Windows for
the masses. It will be easy of use, support, and yes, sex appeal.
> If only the HP 50g worked this way -- can you imagine how much more friendly
> it would be if you plugged in your calculator and saw two more drives show
> up -- "SD Card Reader" and "Flash Drive" -- to let you copy data to and from
> your calculator using any computer with no special drivers?
> The 50g would also work well without special drivers if it implemented its
> USB with a standard USB to serial interface. Many standard USB to serial
> adapters, such as those based on the FTDI chips, are totally "plug and play"
> on every computer I have tried (Windows XP and Vista and modern versions of
> Linux) with no special drivers needed. But then it would show up as a
> serial device (just like the old HP 48!) rather than a mass storage device,
> which may or may not be as useful
Too bad they did not. This thread would have never happened. :-)
This begs the question, how hard would it be to change the existing
50g?
Eric, can you build us a cheap cable that is the combination of your
existing serial adapter and a USB to serial? You may have a great
solution for all Windows users (OS/X and Linux users have an HP
Connect that works--at least for me). Since HP Connect can use COM
ports, no driver needed.
A Y cable would be preferred so that we can also keep the 50g powered.
> I still do too much stuff that I need a real computer for, which is why I
> run Windows, but I know that for most people's needs, they can sit down in
> front of any computer, no matter what the platform, and be equally
> productive given a web browser and a couple basic applications.
Very true with "most people's needs" as the key statement there. And,
with >4B phones worldwide the OS wars have shifted and Apple is
winning. Android has a shot to be king. Windows Mobile? Well, its
still crapware.
rs1n
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-275155.html
IBM saves with Linux:
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39216077,00.htm
I think there you may have some confusion between Macs, Linux/Unix
machines, and Windows machines each as a platform (how well each
platform runs) versus the software available to each platform. Each
platform has their advantages and disadvantages. For example, I would
never consider running a web server using Windows. I would prefer to
do any multimedia editing on a Mac (e.g. Photoshop is a native Mac
application). For publishing papers, I would stick to LaTeX while
running Linux (even though there are packages for LaTeX under
Windows). The only reason I run Windows is because people send me
documents that I would need software which runs on Windows to open.
To claim that Windows is the be-all-end-all solution for computing is
like saying the only type of automobile we ever need is the <insert
most popular car model here> since it is the most widely used car with
the most after-market accessories.
JAM
> On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 07:44:10 -0600, JAM...
>
> Hmm.. must be Jacek!
Hi John. Yes, it's me again.
> How's things in automobile engineering?
Let's just leave it at "difficult" :-)
> My own auto wasn't engineered to last too long,
> that's all I know -- perhaps it was designed using Macs?
No. All major manufacturer use either Catia or NX for design. Both
those CAD systems run on Windows. There are functional subsets of
those packages on Unix but almost nobody is using this on Unix
anymore. For simulation it is typically Dyna, Nastran, Adams etc..
Those CAE applications run on either Unix or Windows. But since CADs
are run on Windows there is an increasing pressure on CAE community to
switch their Unix boxes to Windows just to be common. It cost IT dept
a lot to maintian different systems around and data exchange creates
issues between the systems.
Regarding your car, what brand and model do you have ?
But in general you are right. Cars are engineered to last finite
amount of time. However they are not engineered to last just after
warranty. That would kill your market reception. In general cars are
designed to last about 10 years for a typical user. It is mostly
because of the market competition pressure. Cost of the parts forces
car companies to use cheaper solutions not as robust as you could
have. Another one is fuel efficiency which calls for reduced vehicle
mass. You can reduce mass of many parts assuming finite life. There
are other factors, but it is just not economical these days to create
cars that "last forever". You would loose on the market with such
product due to it's price penalty.
> Actually, the fact that everything breaks down at once
> may indicate greater comprehensive engineering than I have credited :)
We have much better analytical understanding of vehicle physics and
excellent simulation tools for metal fatigue, crash deformation, heat
transfer etc these days. There is a sea of change during last 20
years.
>
> -[ ]-
JAM
data...@gmail.com
> On Nov 13, 9:22 am, "John H Meyers" <jhmey...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 07:44:10 -0600, JAM...
>
> > Hmm.. must be Jacek!
>
> Hi John. Yes, it's me again.
>
> > How's things in automobile engineering?
>
> Let's just leave it at "difficult" :-)
>
> > My own auto wasn't engineered to last too long,
> > that's all I know -- perhaps it was designed using Macs?
>
> No. All major manufacturer use either Catia or NX for design. Both
> those CAD systems run on Windows.
NX for OS/X:
Granted CAE is not there--not yet. CATIA, perhaps someday.
Times are changing.
data...@gmail.com
> I run a Mac for all my development needs. Why? I like the flexibility
> of unix, but I don't want to dick around with making things work.
> Using OSX I get the best of having great OSS and command line tools,
> as well as all the proprietary stuff like MS Office and the Adobe
> Suite. I also spend lots of time in VMware using things like Visual
> studio, ProE, Solidworks and doing lots of software testing. The
> ability to setup multiple operating systems and quickly revert back is
> a great improvement for the type of stuff I do.
>
> Granted, all of that could be done on a windows computer as well.
> However, since switching over 1.5 years ago I have had far less day to
> day frustrations than I ever had in windows land. Windows 7 is
> acceptable to me and I would go with that if I had to, but I still
> have fewer annoyances that tick me off with OSX and I am more
> productive because of it.
Well said. I 100% agree.
Eric Rechlin
> existing serial adapter and a USB to serial? You may have a great
> solution for all Windows users (OS/X and Linux users have an HP
> Connect that works--at least for me). Since HP Connect can use COM
> ports, no driver needed.
Making a new cable that combines the functionality of my existing serial
cable along with a serial to USB adapter is definitely feasible, and if I
were to make it (the right way), I could see a market price of $30 or so
given the cost of components.
However, it's just not worth the time to develop, and it's not worth the
effort of having to build and keep another variation of a product in stock.
If someone else wanted to make such a cable, they can go ahead and do it --
everything you need to know to make the cable I sell is public knowledge
(source code, schematics, board layouts, component lists, etc), so an
entrepreneurial individual could go ahead and make it and sell it himself.
For the few people who aren't satisfied with using USB or an SD card to
transfer data between their calculator and their PC, however, I think their
needs are met sufficiently by using my cable along with a standalone USB to
serial adapter.
Most such adapters are complete and utter garbage, however. You can buy a
USB to serial adapter on eBay for $5, and it'll probably work fine with your
calculator and computer (though some don't work with 64-bit Windows, some
don't work Vista, some are of poor build quality, etc). But I recommend
spending a little more and getting a quality one.
I personally like the FTDI reference adapter, specifically their 10-cm
"premium" adapter, which costs around UK�18 (~US$30):
http://www.ftdichip.com/Products/EvaluationKits/USB-Serial.htm
If there is interest I might buy a few and add them to my site as a new
item. Yes, they are a little expensive, but I feel the added cost is well
worth it over the alternatives.
> A Y cable would be preferred so that we can also keep the 50g powered.
That would indeed be a nice extra feature, and not easily replicated if not
built-in without an ugly mess of wires..
> Android has a shot to be king. Windows Mobile?
> Well, its still crapware.
My money is on Android. Windows Mobile is dead without a complete rewrite,
and although WebOS is excellent in a lot of ways, it doesn't seem to have
much momentum behind it. And I can't recommend the iPhone OS unless Apple
becomes a bit less monopolistic/anti-competitive/evil and it becomes
available in the US on a network provider that isn't utter rubbish.
After having an Android device for a month now, I can see how that platform
brings back the spirit of the HP calculator community of 15+ years ago.
What you have is remarkably similar to the HP-41 or HP 48 of their times --
a fairly open platform, with a low barrier of entry to development, and a
lot of hardware. Think of all that is stuck inside a typical Android phone:
GPS radio, Bluetooth radio, 802.11 radio, voice/data radios, accelerometers,
digital compass, capacitive touchscreen with multitouch, a fast CPU, lots of
RAM/ROM, audio I/O, data I/O, a card slot, and a camera with autofocus and
both still and motion capture. Some have a physical keyboard, trackball,
light sensor, proximity sensor, programmable LED(s) (for illumination for
the camera or as an indicator or trigger), and/or secondary graphics chip.
All this gives you a platform that provides developers with an exciting
environment to make innovative applications. And it's all completely
open -- you can sell your software on Android Market while simultaneously
selling it on your own site while simultaneously giving away a version for
free anywhere you want. Google provides two SDKs, one for higher language
development (compare to User RPL or maybe System RPL) with excellent
documention, and another for native developement (compare to Saturn or ARM
assembly) with a lot less documentation but more power.
I've been going through the applications in the latest Android Developer
Challenge, testing and judging them over the last week. So far I've tried
around 100 of them. Plus, I've loaded lots of other applications from the
Market and from web sites. While there are plenty of apps I have no use for
(compare them to the countless "password lock" or "quadratic equation
solver" applications for calculators), there is a lot of really good stuff
out there too.
I think one reason for the decline of the calculator development community
is things like this. Android brings back the joy that we had 10+ years ago
with calculators, but brings a whole lot more to the table. One theme that
has been brought up in some recent HHCs was that the point of a calculator
was to be "personal". I would argue that a smartphone platform is even more
personal than a calculator -- you *always* have it on your person. And that
is why I think smartphones are the future for the "hacker" type of user that
many of us who use this newsgroup likely are. The only big disadvantage is
the cost (along with a monthly fee if you want voice/WAN service), but that
is becoming more reasonable every year -- right now, figure around $1000 a
year for service and a new device every couple years, and it's only going to
get cheaper.
Regards,
Eric Rechlin
JAM
> For example, I would
> never consider running a web server using Windows.
Agreed, but we are talking personal computer OS here. Not server. Who
needs HP calculator driver for server ?
I'm not an expert on servers, but I'm under the impression, that there
is a myriad of web servers online running Windows. What is the reason
for this ? Are all those IT experts out there idiots ? They can have
Linux server for free. What can be cheaper than this ?
BTW, can you run ASP .NET on non Windows server ?
> I would prefer to
> do any multimedia editing on a Mac (e.g. Photoshop is a native Mac
> application).
Why is that ? What exactly Mac version of Photoshop has, that Windows
version lacks ? PC Magazine did a test couple of years ago and found
out that Photoshop on Windows runs actually faster than the one on the
Mac with similar hardware underpinnings.
> For publishing papers, I would stick to LaTeX while
> running Linux (even though there are packages for LaTeX under
> Windows).
I don't know LaTeX so I would ask the same question. Is there anything
in Windows version missing when compared to Linux ?
And of course, fact that you personally prefer LaTeX does not mean
much. There are probably people who would use GIMP over Photoshop.
So the second question is, what is the world standard for desktop
publishing out there ? I was under the impression that it is one of
the Adobe products originally made for Mac.
Regarding Linux it is probably the worst choice for anybody at home.
It has the least software support, poor hardware support and needs
computer engineer to set it up and maintain. Especially when it comes
to installing new software or trrying to make hardware work. Please,
leave it to the 5% of geeks who insist in being different just for the
sake of it.
> The only reason I run Windows is because people send me
> documents that I would need software which runs on Windows to open.
That is the point. World out there is 95% Windows. Whats the point of
being incompatible ?
> To claim that Windows is the be-all-end-all solution for computing is
> like saying the only type of automobile we ever need is the <insert
> most popular car model here> since it is the most widely used car with
> the most after-market accessories.
There is a lot of truth to what you just said. From all the sedans in
the world they all are basically same and the only reason people
choose one over another is because they want to look different than
their neighbour and possibly show off with their money. Unlike with
cars however, using similar logic with computers is idiotic. Insisting
on being different than your neighbour makes one significantly less
compatible with the rest of the world and that is negative. I use to
have Commodore Amiga. It was the most advanced personal computer in
the world at the time. So what. I barely could buy good software and
rich hardware extensions for it and all had price premium that was
annoying. I have dumped this machine for $100 to some young guy who
wanted to be different from PC crowd and bought myself 386 Windows 3.1
machine. And never looke back since then. Not only Windows quickly
evolved to much more powerfull system that Amiga ever was, but also
since then I had access to cheap plentifull and excellent quality of
hardware and software. Many of those at bargain prices. Some people
complain that Windows 7 does not run 16 bit Windows 3.1 applications.
Don't get me wrong. The fact that Linux, Open Source movement and Mac
exists keep Microsoft in check pricewise and quality wise. So i must
be thankfull to you guys. Microsoft without competition would charge
us arm and leg for their products.
JAM
JAM
> On Nov 13, 9:09 am, JAM <ja_1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 13, 9:22 am, "John H Meyers" <jhmey...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>
> > > On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 07:44:10 -0600, JAM...
>
> > > Hmm.. must be Jacek!
>
> > Hi John. Yes, it's me again.
>
> > > How's things in automobile engineering?
>
> > Let's just leave it at "difficult" :-)
>
> > > My own auto wasn't engineered to last too long,
> > > that's all I know -- perhaps it was designed using Macs?
>
> > No. All major manufacturer use either Catia or NX for design. Both
> > those CAD systems run on Windows.
>
> NX for OS/X:
>
>
> Granted CAE is not there--not yet. CATIA, perhaps someday.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
I have seen both packages. NX for Unix has significanlty reduced
functionality. But you have it wrong just looking on the website.
Originally NX was designed for Unix. It was known at the time as
McDonnel Douglas Unigraphics. It simply over the years changed
ovnership, changed it's name and migrated to Windows. Unix support is
only there for historical reasons for those who cannot yet afford to
replace all their workstations to Windows. Major automotive and
airplane manufacturers already replaced their CAD systems to Windows
years ago. They still have some CAE on Unix and use Unix NX licenses
just to open CAD data on the Unix side. Nodbody does design on Unix
side anymore in those manufacturers. It is CAE that is still better
supported on Unix and it is right now migrating to Windows because of
the pressure from corporations. CATIA also used to be Unix. I belive,
they have completely dumped Unix.
JAM
Raymond Wiker
> On Nov 12, 4:20 pm, Raymond Wiker <r...@RAWMBP-2.local> wrote:
>> JAM <ja_1...@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> You're plain wrong, or at least several years out of date...
>>
>> The situation now is that many people have a Windows PC for
>> work, which they only use because that is what they get given for
>> work. Meanwhile, at home, they use Macs.
>
> I agree. If you do nothing important at home, then Mac is probably
> sufficient. It's fashionable, looks great on the desk and makes you
> feel like you belong to elite. Those of us, however, who still use
> adavnced software at home must use computers that can run it. And that
> is only Windows these days.
I use advanced software at home, and have no Windows machines.
>> Office is not a good reason for using a PC at home, and given
>> that you can actually get good, free alternatives, it is not even a
>> reason for using Windows for work purposes.
>
> Of course it is. Once Office is used at work it makes zero sense to
> make yourself incompatible with Office documents created at work.
> There are no good alternatives for MS Office. There are cheap ersatz
> that can do some of the functionality that is within the MS Office.
> For a light users that maybe sufficient, but for those, who need more
> advanced functionality, "replacements" do not come even close. Take
> for example Excel. Where is a replacement for MS Excel that is
> programmable as easily as Microsoft product is ?
Excel is a pile of crap, and can only be termed "easily
programmable" if you think Visual Basic is a useable programming
language.
> But even if Office is not enough, please, find me good RAD for Macs
> like MS Visual Studio or Embarcadero RAD studio.
Visual Studio is *also* a pile of crap, and costs a
non-negligible amount of money. I've never seen Embarcadero, but a quick
web search indicates that it is Borland, lightly disguised.
> Where is NX or Catia for Mac ? Have you seen Nastran, Adams or
> HyperMesh that runs great on Mac ? I have seen NX for Unix. it is a
> stripped version of Windows original that lacks number of functions. I
> suspect that this is probably a case in a number of applications. NX
> in the past was designed to run on UInix but for many years recently
> it is strictly Windows with some afterthought for those who still run
> Unix.
I don't know any of those applications, but they appear to be
CAD software. I don't do CAD; I do general sw development, and all my
needs are better served by a Unix-like environment than whatever
Microsoft is pushing.
> The simple rule is, whatever is available for Macs, is also available
> for Windows in either same or much better quality (functionality) and
> for less cost. The opposite if however not true. Simple fact of life
> is that mumber of applications and hardware pieces available for
> Windows is not available for other systems or are available with
> reduced functionality and in most cases at a higher price.
Yeah, right... some of the tools I use are either not available
on Windows, or are severely restricted. Microsoft's alternative to a
full Unix environment is a joke.
>
>> Further, many of the companies that switched from Unix to
>> Windows are now looking at Mac OS X and Linux; either for better
>> stability and performance, better security or simply for cost reasons.- Hide quoted text -
>
> Name one big company that does this.
IBM has already been mentioned. A quick google for "switches to
linux", "switches to mac" and "switches to apple" shows more examples of
companies and government bodies switching away from Microsoft products.
Joel Koltner
news:7m5i1mF...@mid.individual.net...
> However, it's just not worth the time to develop
OK... although I think you'd find that the development time, dropping in an
FTDI-type IC, is far less than what you spent on the original cable, having to
de-brain-damage the 50g's serial interace.
> and it's not worth the effort of having to build and keep another variation
> of a product in stock.
Might I suggest you just drop the old "real" RS-232 cables then? I'd be
surprised if the percentage of people who don't have USB ports on their
computers today was even 1%.
> If someone else wanted to make such a cable, they can go ahead and do it --
> everything you need to know to make the cable I sell is public knowledge
> (source code, schematics, board layouts, component lists, etc), so an
> entrepreneurial individual could go ahead and make it and sell it himself.
Thanks, that's good to know.
> Most such adapters are complete and utter garbage, however. You can buy a
> USB to serial adapter on eBay for $5, and it'll probably work fine with your
> calculator and computer (though some don't work with 64-bit Windows, some
> don't work Vista, some are of poor build quality, etc). But I recommend
> spending a little more and getting a quality one.
My unofficial impression is that 90+% of USB to serial adapters use either
Prolific or FTDI chips. Prolific works OK (and seems to be the *most*
popular), but I agree with you that FTDI is the best choice out there.
I'll keep my mind open about Android; it sounds pretty cool. At the moment
I'm sticking with Windows Mobile based on the excellent hardware that is the
HTC Touch Pro 2 and very good multimedia support via Core Player and GPS
support via Copilot Live. (Until a few months ago, I used a Nokia N800 --
excellent machine -- for movies on airplanes, GPS, and eBook reading... it's
great that I now have all of this built into a phone.)
> The only big disadvantage is the cost (along with a monthly fee if you want
> voice/WAN service), but that is becoming more reasonable every year
Well, strictly speaking you don't need a voice/data plan just to use your
smartphone as a calculator, right? :-)
I think the big disadvantages of a smartphone is the lack of a "hard"
keyboard. As touchscreens get better and better this will become less of a
problem, but today I think most people find the keys on even at HP 50g
preferable to touching a touchscreen, even if there is haptic feedback.
Better battery life would be good too, although realistically people are used
to charging their phone every day or two, so I suppose I can't really
complain.
---Joel
JAM
Define "advanced". Some crappy console line driven c compiler ? It's
XXI century you know.
> Excel is a pile of crap, and can only be termed "easily
> programmable" if you think Visual Basic is a useable programming
> language.
Name better programmable spreadsheet. Visual Basic is pretty good
language for non programmers. Microsoft discovered long time ago, that
majority of computer users will not be programmers. You want to
compare this with Open Office spreadsheet or Unix Xess crap ? What
spreadsheet do you use that is "so better" than Excel ? Do you need C+
+ compiler to add some extra functionality to it ?
> Visual Studio is *also* a pile of crap, and costs a
> non-negligible amount of money. I've never seen Embarcadero, but a quick
> web search indicates that it is Borland, lightly disguised.
Really ? And you use what ? Some crappy open source gc ? Please. Name
one that you use and we can compare it with Microsoft c compiler. We
will see which one produces faster code.
What is wrong with Borland ? For a long time they were able to compete
quite well with Microsoft and they still do Delphi that is still very
popular in Europe.
> I don't know any of those applications, but they appear to be
> CAD software. I don't do CAD;
But many engineers do. CAD and CAE. They also tend to use advanced
calculators a lot. See the pattern ?
> I do general sw development, and all my
> needs are better served by a Unix-like environment than whatever
> Microsoft is pushing.
If you do sw development for Unix that good luck to you. You customer
market just shrank 95%.
> Yeah, right... some of the tools I use are either not available
> on Windows, or are severely restricted. Microsoft's alternative to a
> full Unix environment is a joke.
Unix is a joke. It used to be great in the previous century. I'm sure
you are attached to so yesterday system. But the world moved on.
> > Name one big company that does this.
>
> IBM has already been mentioned. A quick google for "switches to
> linux", "switches to mac" and "switches to apple" shows more examples of
> companies and government bodies switching away from Microsoft products.
IBM lost long time ago it's competition with Microsoft. Remember OS2
fiasco ? Only IBM could be so stupid. Their products are simply not
competitive on Windows. One just need to see Lotus Notes to see how
screw up IBM has become. It is no surprise they abandoned Windows.
They simply can't compete with Microsoft so they switched to the area
where Microsoft have chosen not to compete. Name one manufacturing
corporation that is switching from Windows to something else.
:-)
JAM
Eric Rechlin
> OK... although I think you'd find that the development time, dropping in
> an FTDI-type IC, is far less than what you spent on the original cable,
> having to de-brain-damage the 50g's serial interace.
Maybe, but if I want to reuse what I did on the serial cable, I would end up
with something that is too large to fit inside the D-sub enclosure, which
makes things a lot more difficult.
> Might I suggest you just drop the old "real" RS-232 cables then? I'd be
> surprised if the percentage of people who don't have USB ports on their
> computers today was even 1%.
That's missing the entire point of my cable. It is not meant to interface
with a computer (that's why you need a null-modem adapter to do it) -- it
works, but it's not the intended purpose. It's meant for interfacing with
other devices, such as GPS receivers, multimeters, and other instruments.
If you want to talk to a computer, just use the included USB cable as HP
intended. As was pointed out elsewhere in this thread, there are drivers
for pretty much any major OS, either provided by HP or written by the
community.
> I think the big disadvantages of a smartphone is the lack of a "hard"
> keyboard.
Plenty of smartphones have real keyboards. Of course, none are as good as
the keyboard on a quality HP calculator, but that's mainly due to the size
difference.
> Better battery life would be good too, although realistically people are
> used to charging their phone every day or two, so I suppose I can't really
> complain.
As long as a single charge gets you through an entire day, I don't think
there's much to complain about -- it can charge while you sleep. If this is
not possible, I suppose one could always bring some spare batteries.
They're cheap on eBay for most smartphones.
Regards,
Eric Rechlin
manjo
JAM i'm all the way with you, also i belive i do understand
the other "open source" side and some of their benefits as well (bin there,
done that).
So here's my contribution to 64bit opensource office drivers subject :-)
There is NO proper substitute for MS office <period>
For countless reasons -it's nice if you can see/admit this, if not... the
better for you
(easier to accept the substitutes).
Low-end users may not realize all the advanced stuff available in M$ Office
and by not knowing and not using advanced functionality those may claim
OpenOffice
was as good as MS Office (once again ... ITS not and i don't see it in the
near future).
A LOT of speicalized software a lot of development tools and so on are
available on Windows at the same time not available on other platforms or
not as
frequently updated and maintained as with M$ -also true.
Although the point of "open source" was exactly the opposite (availability,
updatability, contribution etc...)
For those "in to" open source and free software: let me remind you that
there are TONS
of "open soruce" projects as well as free tools and software based on
windows platform as well.
"Open source" is falsely but often asociated with Linux or other open source
OS-es.
Open soruce project doesn't require open source hardware and software
platform.
However i don't see a point in arguing about this further because its a
simple matter of choice.
For as long as there will be a choice (in any matter) there will be people
convincig us...
that their choice is the right one, also there will be more radical people
which will say it's the only choice or "logical consequence" of everything
that was before and all other choices are wrong or dum.
Just remember... at that point things tend not to be a freedom of choice it
becomes a religion, or dogma if you will, and as such limits again the
freedoms which led to this argument in the first place...
So, my opinion for today is:
Offices are not the same, M$ has a lot of features and arguments working
which substitutes don't and it will stay so
in the forseeable future. (it's not by coincidence that MS Office is
standard in most offices/companies)
If you choose not to belive me you will NOT be damned, and you should not
allow yourself to be forced or preached in to
something you don't like or don't understand, but you should not try to
"convert" other people either.
As to 64bit platforms (and drivers)...
time is not right to switch your desktop/workstation/laptop from 32bit to
64bit for many resons drivers being among most important.
Remember we got fully operational 32bit proccessor (386) but it took some
time to get to fully functional 32bit OS-es with decent driver support.
True, there is some "waist" of having 64bit capable hardware running in
32bit mode, however if the compatibility is to be maintained 32bit is the
way to go.
64bit is safe choice for most server applications if it's a database server,
webserver, fileserver ... whatever, but you should not expect signifficant
benefits over 32bit except for greater ammount of memory that your
proccessor/OS will be able to handle.
Example:
So if you're planing to have 1 host OS and about 4GiB of memory you still
don't have a solid reason to go 64bitwise.
excuse me for the length of the post
-that's just something i had in mind for this subject
manjo
http://fly.srk.fer.hr/~manjo/openfire
Joel Koltner
news:hdov8m$lh1$1...@sunce.iskon.hr...
> Low-end users may not realize all the advanced stuff available in M$ Office
> and by not knowing and not using advanced functionality those may claim
> OpenOffice
> was as good as MS Office (once again ... ITS not and i don't see it in the
> near future).
I agree with you that most users don't have a clue just how powerful MSO
really is "under the hold." What I usually claim that OpenOffice has more
than enough features for what the vast majority of Microsoft Office users
*actually use* -- the number of people who ever record a macro in Word is
probably less than 5 in 100, and those who write their own VB scripts or
control Word (etc.) via the standard COM interface is likely under 1 in 100.
(In general I think that COM is one of the most undervalued aspect of
Windows -- Linux doesn't seem to have anything that's nearly as ubiquitous
when it comes to automation, and instead you see a lot of slightly-scary shell
scripts that glue everything together. It works, but it ain't pretty.)
> However i don't see a point in arguing about this further because its a
> simple matter of choice.
Agreed, and now that it's pretty easy and cheap to run virtual machines,
there's no reason people can't just run whatever mix of OSes they like.
> As to 64bit platforms (and drivers)...
> time is not right to switch your desktop/workstation/laptop from 32bit to
> 64bit for many resons drivers being among most important.
I've been surprised just how many OEMs (Acer, HP, etc.) are shipping Windows 7
as a 64-bit installation -- even on relatively low-end machines like CULV
models (one step up from a netbook, e.g., Acer AS1410s).
---Joel
Joel Koltner
> That's missing the entire point of my cable. It is not meant to interface
> with a computer (that's why you need a null-modem adapter to do it) -- it
> works, but it's not the intended purpose. It's meant for interfacing with
> other devices, such as GPS receivers, multimeters, and other instruments.
Ah, gotcha -- I had missed that point.
In that case, USB wouldn't really make a lot of sense at all. I take it all
back. :-)
---Joel
John H Meyers
Most of what I just read presumes that only one system
is a "winner" and others are "losers"
How about arguing, then, whether men or women are better overall;
would the elimination of whichever group is inferior
make for an improved world?
Wherever there has been competition, good ideas from all competitors
seem to infiltrate the others, to the extent possible.
Where unlike systems exist, taking completely different approaches,
keeping the different approaches all available, under one roof,
permits the best solution for every task
to be found from a wider range of possibilities.
OS X with a Unix core, Windows with its additional scripting methods,
or optional Cygwin (Unix), certainly can offer much more
than just one of its aspects alone,
and a multi-OS system can offer all that's advantageous
from each that exists within.
Price is also not a negligible consideration,
so even if some very expensive things
can go where some less expensive things can not,
those who do not need the race car
but do need an economical alternative
can certainly benefit from the latter,
and would be wasting money on the former.
Nature seems to have populated the universe,
from the largest scales of entire galaxies
down to the insignifcant locale of a single small planet,
with great variety, and the ultimate success of any subset
seems to be connected with having enough variety of good things,
not with having any one "best" thing overrun all others.
Every time that humans (or any other forces) have interfered
with that balance, it has only screwed things up.
-[ ]-
JAM
> How about arguing, then, whether men or women are better overall;
> would the elimination of whichever group is inferior
> make for an improved world?
John
Elimination of nazis certainly did improved the world :-)
JAM
Tom Lake
"JAM" <ja_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:59488801-0be4-41ce...@j4g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
For those TI readers here (yes, there are some!) There's
a patch to TI-Connect that lets it run with 64-bit versions of
Vista and Win 7. I use it with Win 7 at home and it works fine.
(fix the link below to fit on one line, of course)
Tom Lake