HP50G EOL

[Angry Bird]

Does anyone have an estimation on how much longer the HP50G has before HP stops selling it?

Bonus question: Is this the last of the HP48G/50G RPN type calculators we will see from HP in the foreseeable future? (I don't consoder the HP Prime a candidate to fill this void.)

[Steve R.]

On Tuesday, January 13, 2015 at 7:07:44 PM UTC-8, Angry Bird wrote:
> Does anyone have an estimation on how much longer the HP50G has before HP stops selling it?
>

>(I don't consoder the HP Prime a candidate to fill this void.)

I agree, the HP Prime is not considered a TRUE Engineering RPN Machine.
The HP48/HP50G are the ones to go for in terms of flexibility/programmability.
Yes, the PRIME offers more CPU/RAM/Storage/Screen power, but not even close to what the HP48/HP50G can do.

A slight improvement from HP for the HP50G would be great.
HP gave a lifted look to the HP39GII back in 2011.
Then, why wouldn't they give a lifted look/improvement to the HP50G.

I personally was hoping for a 25th Anniversary Edition of the HP48.
Although, this would be impossible, since most manufacturing for the HP48 is lost. However, the HP50G is still in production and HP could very well do a 25th Edition in the form of a HP50G, not sure!

Will HP stop production for the HP50G anytime soon?
I hope not and most likely not.

Just my opinion of course...

[supergems]

Il giorno mercoledì 14 gennaio 2015 04:07:44 UTC+1, Angry Bird ha scritto:
> Does anyone have an estimation on how much longer the HP50G has before HP stops selling it?
>
> Bonus question: Is this the last of the HP48G/50G RPN type calculators we will see from HP in the foreseeable future? (I don't consoder the HP Prime a candidate to fill this void.)

vote the "Implement full rpn" for HP Prime at http://www.tricider.com/brainstorming/2eKfifdjarx ;)

[Angry Bird]

I would love nothing more than to purchase an updated HP48GX machine with updated capabilities. Nothing against the HP50g but it isn't the 48G series form factor. At this point I would support an App from HP for my iPhone 6+. I know most don't like the App idea but after seeing the speed the app runs the HP48G series (and the size being almost the same on my iPhone compared to the real thing) on my iPhone I have to ask why not??? Imagine if HP put out an app that gets upgraded hardware every time you get a new phone. I would pay full price for this app.

Either way, I would like to see a return to the HP48G series form factor and a 25th anniversary model would have been nice. Maybe they should do a Kickstarter to fund development.

On Wednesday, January 14, 2015 at 4:09:09 PM UTC-5, Steve R. wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 13, 2015 at 7:07:44 PM UTC-8, Angry Bird wrote:
> > Does anyone have an estimation on how much longer the HP50G has before HP stops selling it?
> >

> >(I don't consider the HP Prime a candidate to fill this void.)

[TW]

On Thursday, January 15, 2015 at 8:34:20 AM UTC-7, Angry Bird wrote:
> I would love nothing more than to purchase an updated HP48GX machine with updated capabilities.

I can pretty much categorically say that will never happen. It already has happened from HP's perspective - the 49/50 series.

>I have to ask why not???

Can you imagine trying to sell that to a manager? "Well, we want to step back to the version of the calculator that is from 1990. Oh, that 49/50g thing you've been selling for 15 years... yeah, that is pretty much the same thing as what we want but we are going to throw away 15 years of sales and do it over by starting from the earlier version."

I can't even imagine a world in which that discussion would go anywhere...

TW

[Oregonian Haruspex]

Angry Bird <apl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would love nothing more than to purchase an updated HP48GX machine with
> updated capabilities.

It's called the 50g. It is an updated 48gx, software compatible, but you
can also program it in C for a massive speed up.

>Nothing against the HP50g but it isn't the 48G series form factor.

Other than the buttons being rearranged a tiny bit, and the vastly improved
screen, and the massive improvement of having an SD slot instead of the
expansion ports, it is totally the 48g form factor.

[snr...@gmail.com]

The HP50g is a battery hog. Consumes over ten times the power of a 48sx, and doesn't have a good serial cable for interfacing with other serial devices. Don't get me wrong I like the 50G and all it's features, but there are some things an old hp48SX does better.

[Oregonian Haruspex]

The older models in the series did offer better battery life, it's true. I
do think this is mitigated to some degree by the higher capacity low self
discharge NIMHs that are available now, and the fact that the 50g can be
run off USB power.

[supergems]

HP 50g RS-232 Serial Cable
http://commerce.hpcalc.org/serialcable.php
http://www.allenwan.com/hpcalcserialcable/

[Acer]

Fully agree - the HP50G is an excellent replacement for the Hp48 series which I still love dearly & have a number of versions in my collection :-). However, the HP50G is the calculator that I carry in my brief case daily & know it will come up with an answer in quick time.

Cheers,

Michael

[Oregonian Haruspex]

On 2015-01-16 11:20:38 +0000, Acer said:

> Fully agree - the HP50G is an excellent replacement for the Hp48 series
> which I still love dearly & have a number of versions in my collection
> :-). However, the HP50G is the calculator that I carry in my brief case
> daily & know it will come up with an answer in quick time.

I bought an HP-48G last year for $10 because it was there. While I
like it a lot, it led me to buy a 50G which I think is a much better
machine all around.

I keep the 48G on my bookshelf in the math section, so that my guests
can feel free to use it or even just remark "what the heck's that?"

I keep the HP-12c on the same shelf for similar reasons, as well as a
TI-92+ which most folks seem to gravitate to first.

[snr...@gmail.com]

Lets assume a you're using the best AAA's available the Enloop XXX. They have a capacity of 900 mA

Hp50G - Current drain while transmitting serial ~89 mA (using 4 AAA's)
Hp48SX - Current drawin while transmitting serial ~7.9mA (using 3 AAA's)
Ref: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/comp.sys.hp48/hp50$20current$20draw$20eric/comp.sys.hp48/bexAGcNPl4Y/oNvvO_ZfBVMJ
Ref2: http://www.hpcalc.org/hp48/docs/misc/drain.htm

Hp50G will need 4 new batteries in 10.1 hours
Hp48SX will need 3 new batteries in 113.9 hours (11 times longer battery life with one less AAA!)

The hp50G is just about as power hungry as todays cellphones. One might as well just run EMU48 on there phone rather than get an HP50G.

[snr...@gmail.com]

I have two of those cables and they are not sufficient for many applications that the hp48 and hp49G cables are.

I get garbage and dropped characters mixed in with the IO with the HP50G cable. Using the same programs on the hp48SX, GX and 49G I have never had issue with dropped or garbage IO data.

[Dan O'Connell]

On 2015-01-15, TW <timwe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, January 15, 2015 at 8:34:20 AM UTC-7, Angry Bird wrote:
>> I would love nothing more than to purchase an updated HP48GX machine with
>updated capabilities.

alot of us agree with that

>>I have to ask why not???
>
> Can you imagine trying to sell that to a manager? "Well, we want to step
>back to the version of the calculator that is from 1990. Oh, that 49/50g
>thing you've been selling for 15 years... yeah, that is pretty much the
>same thing as what we want but we are going to throw away 15 years of sales
>and do it over by starting from the earlier version."

Hmmmm what about the 15C LE? If enough people ask for it why shouldn't they
listen? Are any new agers flocking to buy new 15C's after selling their
iphones? It's something old hp customers want and they sold them all. Now a
NOS version goes for 600 bucks.

[Dan O'Connell]

On 2015-01-15, Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Angry Bird <apl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I would love nothing more than to purchase an updated HP48GX machine with
>> updated capabilities.
>
> It's called the 50g. It is an updated 48gx, software compatible, but you
> can also program it in C for a massive speed up.

C!!! that's for girls haha. Try arm assembly if you really want SPEED

>
>>Nothing against the HP50g but it isn't the 48G series form factor.

quite true

>
> Other than the buttons being rearranged a tiny bit, and the vastly improved
> screen, and the massive improvement of having an SD slot instead of the
> expansion ports, it is totally the 48g form factor.

the keyboard was totally screwed up the enter key is the wrong size and
location and it is no longer the beautiful quality of the 48. rubbery
bouncy pc keys and no more doubleshots. woe is to us that quality is
dead. the 50g body is more like a fat lazy iphone than anything resembling a
48 its too wide to hold securely. the 48 was exactly the perfect size and all that.
the screen and sd card and memory are huge improvements no doubt. unfortunately
many of the commonly used functions are now deep in menuland instead of on the
familiar key. dont get me wrong i love the 50G for the power and upgrades and have
a drawerfull of them but im not selling my drawer of 48's.

[Dan O'Connell]

+1. the 50G is about 7 times faster in RPL than a 48G or GX but it does go
through batteries alot faster maybe its worth it i didn't check. i dont look
at the 50G as a 48 replacement. its just like a bigger brother but the
younger brother still does some things better.

the sx is awfully slow but is fine for desk use ie. non-programming

at the end of the day the 50G and 48 are better than anything anyone else
has ever come up with so im not complaining.

Dan

[Dan O'Connell]

On 2015-01-17, Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 2015-01-16 11:20:38 +0000, Acer said:
>
>> Fully agree - the HP50G is an excellent replacement for the Hp48 series
>> which I still love dearly & have a number of versions in my collection
>> :-). However, the HP50G is the calculator that I carry in my brief case
>> daily & know it will come up with an answer in quick time.
>
> I bought an HP-48G last year for $10 because it was there. While I
> like it a lot, it led me to buy a 50G which I think is a much better
> machine all around.

i guess you dont do much programming. i mean the editing on the 50G is nice
and all but it takes much longer to find the function you want with the huge
number of menus and the way they got reorganized. the 48 turns out to be
faster for most programming. after you get it working there running it on
the 50G is the cats meow

>
> I keep the 48G on my bookshelf in the math section, so that my guests
> can feel free to use it or even just remark "what the heck's that?"
>
> I keep the HP-12c on the same shelf for similar reasons, as well as a
> TI-92+ which most folks seem to gravitate to first.

the 12c is also much faster in actual use for financial calcs and other basic
math stuff than anything that came after it. its another example where hp
nailed it the first time and everything was downhill from there. sure the
new arm version is a thousand times faster but i mean other models where
they just didn't get the usability on the same level and certainly not the
same build quality and finish of those classic models the faithful amongst
us have come to know and love since the 1970's. the 30b is a screamer but
again in actual use it gets it's butt kicked by the 12c because all the
functions are buried deep in menus

[TW]

> Hmmmm what about the 15C LE? If enough people ask for it why shouldn't they
> listen? Are any new agers flocking to buy new 15C's after selling their
> iphones? It's something old hp customers want and they sold them all. Now a
> NOS version goes for 600 bucks.

It was a totally different situation. The 12C was and is still actively being maintained. To make a 15C was simply a matter of changing the 12C key labels, having the manual updated, and that was essentially it.

The 48 is not maintained, there is no way to "just change the printing" nor do you have any location to purchase those processors as they are long out of production.

Updating the 50g for a new platform (internal hardware) would be a very difficult and time consuming project. Doing the 48gx would be at least 2-3x THAT work. I just can't ever see a PHB being willing to do it.

TW

[Dan O'Connell]

I didn't realize the 15C was built on the 12C but I should have. Anyway the
50G seems to prove you don't need to buy 48's processors to do that project.
What I think we are all talking about is stuffing what the 50G is today back
into a 48 form factor with the old quality touches. Nobody is against an ARM
CPU with tons of memory an sd card and a great screen but we also liked the old
menus and the doubleshot keys and the way the 48 feels just right. The problem
isn't the 50G isn't a great calculator because it is. The problem is it isn't a
48 and most of that could be solved by taking the 50G guts and stuffing them
in something closer to a 48 than the 747 widebody iPhone they're making now.
And while they are at it they should put back the card slots because there
are plenty of good cards and good apps around running on our old 48's.

Dan

[Leviatan]

A Dan O'Connell se le ha ocurrido que:

> I didn't realize the 15C was built on the 12C but I should have. Anyway the
> 50G seems to prove you don't need to buy 48's processors to do that project.
> What I think we are all talking about is stuffing what the 50G is today back
> into a 48 form factor with the old quality touches. Nobody is against an ARM
> CPU with tons of memory an sd card and a great screen but we also liked the
> old menus and the doubleshot keys and the way the 48 feels just right. The
> problem isn't the 50G isn't a great calculator because it is. The problem is
> it isn't a 48 and most of that could be solved by taking the 50G guts and
> stuffing them in something closer to a 48 than the 747 widebody iPhone
> they're making now. And while they are at it they should put back the card
> slots because there are plenty of good cards and good apps around running on
> our old 48's.

I'm afraid that even the last goo old 48's didn't have the double shot
keys... and, having worked in a company that manufactures plastic
parts, I can assure you that the 48 body is way more expensive to
manufacture than the 50G one... and what is worse, if the plastic
injection moulds have not been well cared after production ceased (or
even scrapped) refurbishing them could cost a pretty high ammount of
money. Even moer... if you read the HP Journal reagrding the launch of
HP48SX (a really advisable number, that describes both its internals
and its design&manufacturing process), you will realize taht the
production line used for pioneers/charlemagne series was really complex
and advanced; much more than anything you will find now for such a
product, and I bet that it was completely scrapped after the last HP
48G+ units were manufactured and production was outsourced... the
journal istelf suggests that what made the line profitable was the
manufacturing of pioneers, as the volume of 48's was quite low compared
with them...

It's a pity, but the more I think about it, the more problems I find to
"resurrect" the 48 (you can say the same for the HP42, although in this
case, they can use the HP17BII+ body in the same way they did with
HP12C/15C LE.

And don't misunderstand me... I will be one of the first people in the
queue to buy a couple of them if such a miracle ever happens...

--
Un saludo,
Alberto

[Leviatan]

Leviatan, pensando en voz alta, dice:

> if you read the HP Journal
> reagrding the launch of HP48SX (a really advisable number, that describes
> both its internals and its design&manufacturing process)

By the way, here is the so called HP journal number:

http://www.hpl.hp.com/hpjournal/pdfs/IssuePDFs/1991-06.pdf

--
Un saludo,
Alberto

[jameslu...@gmail.com]

I'm puzzled by statements about the size of the HP 50g compared to the '48. Yes, it's 11% wider and 3% longer. It's also 11% thinner or 1.2% more volume overall. That's a pretty small change. Yes, it's rounder - to each their own.

I ended up giving my '48 and '49s to struggling students who use them well as I found that my '50 ended up replacing them. The greater speed, better display and enhanced selection of functions made that choice easy.

Battery life? I've yet to use the serial port - the SD card has served well to save and transfer software. As such, I think I'm on my third set since I got it years ago. Having used the HP-25, HP-67, HP-75 and others that would run two hours on a charge (and forget everything when they ran dry), I'm happy with the '50.

I do hope the '50 is available for a long time - unless HP does indeed create a superior replacement. Even the Prime, with a real RPL or RPN, better key label colors and USB master capability would be a real candidate. Yes, its battery life would be abysmal compared to the '50 or '48 (or the '15) but so is my cell phone's and I use it anyway...

[omar deen]

I've been using the HP50 for quite sometime now. I started using it when I retired my GX. I recently found my GX in storage in boxes couple months ago. I started using it and it was painfully slow. I quickly put it back in the box and stated using my HP50. The HP50 is a great machine I will take speed over battery life any day. All the HP50g need is a little tweaking.

OMARDEEN

[Angry Bird]

Want to sell your GX?

My GX on my iPhone blisters the 50g and when you experience that kind of speed on a GX, you realize how much you loved your 48gx.

[Oregonian Haruspex]

Of course the power draw is higher, but it's hardly as bad as a cell
phone. I'm not sure if the power draw figures you quote are really
fair either - while the 50g draws more power while making a serial port
transmission, it also has the huge advantage of being able to be
powered over USB. If this is your sole for either calculator, you're
probably better off with the 50G and an external power supply or
suitable battery (which will probably be available given that you're
near a wall outlet or battery powered serial device), either of which
can give the 50G an enormously larger life than the 48 series which has
no ability to use external power.

Let's look at the charts you linked to:

Ref 1: ______________________________________________________________________

Calculator 50G 50G 49G+ 49G+ 49G 48GX 48GX 48GX
# of cards 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 2
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
Idle 15.5 14.9 13.9 12.5 6.9 4.9 5.3 6.0
Blinking 18.8 18.2 16.9 15.6 9.5 8.6 9.0 10.0
Plotting 74.4 79.5 69.3 73.3 20.5 23.2 23.8 25.3
Transmit Serial 89.2 93.1 n/a n/a 21.6 24.3 25.0 26.3
Transmit USB 86.1 89.9 70.4 74.7 n/a n/a n/a n/a
Transmit IR 88.5 92.0 74.1 78.3 n/a 24.3 25.0 26.3
Open I/O Serial 30.7 34.9 n/a n/a 7.4 5.3 5.8 6.4
Open I/O USB 27.7 31.8 25.6 29.8 n/a n/a n/a n/a
Open I/O IR 31.0 35.2 29.9 34.1 n/a 4.9 5.3 6.0
Beep 1 kHz 79.5 83.5 62.7 62.0 21.9 23.6 24.5 25.0
Write flash 90.0 95.2 74.0 73.4 24.5 n/a n/a n/a
Read flash 77.0 82.0 63.6 67.7 24.5 n/a n/a n/a
Write SD n/a 72.0 n/a 68.0 n/a n/a n/a n/a
Read SD n/a 72.0 n/a 68.0 n/a n/a n/a n/a
Off 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.8

0: Zero cards installed
1: 128 KB HP (or 128 MB Sandisk) card in slot 1
2: 128 KB HP card in slot 1 and 1 MB HP card in slot 2

Ref 2: ______________________________________________________________________

Current (mA) |
SX:E | GX:L | GX:M | Operation
------|------|------|------------------------------------------------
?? | ?? | ?? | Coma mode [ON]-[SPC]
?? | ?? | ?? | Off
2.2 | 4.8 | 4.3 | idle, RAM empty
2.2 | 4.8 | 4.3 | idle, RAM full
2.2 | 4.8 | 4.3 | idle, contrast as dark as possible
2.2 | 4.8 | 4.3 | idle, contrast as light as possible
< 4.6 |< 6.0 |< 5.6 | idle, Clock on in status line (fluctuates a lot)
3.3 | 7.0 | 6.2 | Command line input/Edit
6.2 | 14.1 | ?? | holding down [ON]
| | |
6.5 | 16.5 | 14.2 | User-RPL loop
5.1 | 12.0 | 11.1 | fEVAL of User-RPL loop (LCD screen turned off)
6.3 | 15.9 | 13.9 | system-RPL loop
4.9 | 11.7 | 10.8 | fEVAL of system-RPL loop (LCD screen turned off)
4.9 | 13.7 | 11.5 | machine language loop
3.4 | 9.2 | 8.5 | fEVAL of machine language loop (LCD screen turned off)
| | |
6.3 | 16.3 | 14.1 | BEEP (600 Hz)
8.1 | 17.9 | 15.7 | BEEP (6000 Hz)
8.6 | 18.3 | 16.3 | BEEP (>= 10000 Hz)
| | |
6.3 | 16.6 | ?? | Tetris 1.52 by Detlef Muller (sys-RPL)
5.2 | 13.5 | ?? | Diamonds by Doug Cannon (ML)
| | |
------|------|------|- RAM CARDS ---- HP 128Kb cards ----------------
3.2 | 6.7 | 6.1 | idle, 1 card (either port) freed
3.2 | 6.7 | 6.1 | idle, 1 card merged
4.5 | 8.6 | 7.8 | idle, 2 cards freed
4.5 | n/a | n/a | idle, 2 cards merged
| | |
------|------|------|- WIRE TRANSMISSIONS ---------------------------
2.2 | 4.8 | 4.3 | idle, connected, IO port closed
3.1 | 6.9 | ?? | idle, connected, IO port open
7.9 | 19.0 | ?? | receiving from IBM
7.8 | 18.4 | ?? | sending to IBM
| | |
------|------|------|- IR TRANSMISSIONS -----------------------------
2.5 | 5.3 | 4.7 | idle, IO port open
7.0 | 16.8 | ?? | trying to connect
9.8 | 18.7 | ?? | sending to another HP48
15.6 | 43.0 | 38.0 | (!) PRLCD (printing, no IR printer nearby)
------|------|------|------------------------------------------------

_____________________________________________________________________________


It's pretty clear that the 50G consumes, on average, about 3x the power
of the 48GX series. The SX series consumes less power than the GX,
presumably, because it has less memory to keep alive and it is slower.
But it'd be fair to calculate battery life not just based on look at
how much power is drawn for serial transmission, but rather by how much
power is used given your average use case. The 50G is anywhere between
three and seven times as fast as the 48GX, and the 48GX is between two
and three times as fast as the 48SX. It's also fair to compare the 50G
to the 48GX / SX with cards in both slots. This increases its power
consumption by quite a bit at all times. In the off state, the 48GX
draws (per your references) almost a milliamp with two cards. The 50G
draws essentially nothing. If your calculator sits in a drawer, being
used only occasionally, this could be the difference between dead
batteries and living ones.

Because the 50G calculates anywhere between 10-30 times faster than the
48SX, and with C programs possibly thousands of times as fast, your
peak draw during a calculation is of course higher, but the average
draw over time, and represented by power consumed per math problem
worked, is likely to be much lower. Your productivity is also likely
to be enhanced, as difficult problems will take much less time.

If power consumption on a single set of batteris is your ultimate test,
it's hard to argue against the HP48SX. But if you look at it as a
function of mathematical work done per set of batteries, the 50G is
probably better and if you add in the productivity gains from having
your calculations done much more quickly, the newer machine looks even
better.

[Oregonian Haruspex]

Sadly the mobile calculators are just not quite all there. The lack of
real hardware buttons is really detrimental overall from my perspective.

For the same reason, I wouldn't want to write a novel or write much
code using the iPad's onscreen keyboard. No tactile feedback.

[Oregonian Haruspex]

On 2015-01-17 19:40:34 +0000, Dan O'Connell said:

> On 2015-01-17, Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On 2015-01-16 11:20:38 +0000, Acer said:
>>
>>> Fully agree - the HP50G is an excellent replacement for the Hp48 series
>>> which I still love dearly & have a number of versions in my collection
>>> :-). However, the HP50G is the calculator that I carry in my brief case
>>> daily & know it will come up with an answer in quick time.
>>
>> I bought an HP-48G last year for $10 because it was there. While I
>> like it a lot, it led me to buy a 50G which I think is a much better
>> machine all around.
>
> i guess you dont do much programming. i mean the editing on the 50G is nice
> and all but it takes much longer to find the function you want with the huge
> number of menus and the way they got reorganized. the 48 turns out to be
> faster for most programming. after you get it working there running it on
> the 50G is the cats meow

No, I am just starting to explore User RPL and I probably won't bother
with System RPL - instead I will likely write C programs for the 50g.
I had a TI-85 in school, and I became pretty good at writing all kinds
of programs for it. Sadly, I did not know about HP calculators at that
time. Only one kid in my entire high school (2500+ kids) had an HP-48
and I didn't "get" it then. The TI-85 was a fine machine in its day
though, and easy to program.

I do really appreciate HLP49 on my 50G - it is a really fine piece of
software and it makes finding functions much easier. Also it seems
that if you turn off the default setting of choose boxes instead of
menus it becomes very much like the 48GX in terms of the menus and
their organization.

>>
>> I keep the 48G on my bookshelf in the math section, so that my guests
>> can feel free to use it or even just remark "what the heck's that?"
>>
>> I keep the HP-12c on the same shelf for similar reasons, as well as a
>> TI-92+ which most folks seem to gravitate to first.
>
> the 12c is also much faster in actual use for financial calcs and other basic
> math stuff than anything that came after it. its another example where hp
> nailed it the first time and everything was downhill from there. sure the
> new arm version is a thousand times faster but i mean other models where
> they just didn't get the usability on the same level and certainly not the
> same build quality and finish of those classic models the faithful amongst
> us have come to know and love since the 1970's. the 30b is a screamer but
> again in actual use it gets it's butt kicked by the 12c because all the
> functions are buried deep in menus

I would like to obtain other calculators in the same seriesas the 12C,
but they are so frightfully expensive.

If it helps, my favorite programming language is Smalltalk, followed by
Mathematica. Both are more than languages, they are complete
environments as well. Perhaps this is why I like User RPL on an HP
calc - it is an integrated calculation / computation system rather than
just a language.

Anyway I am adapting a version of NEC (an antenna modeler) to my 50G
just for fun. I am working on the same project in Mathematica and it's
possible that they will take about the same amount of effort to have
feature parity, including graphics!

[Angry Bird]

I respect your opinion but after using the GX on a 6+ I don't even think about real buttons anymore.

[snr...@gmail.com]

It's my understanding the SX consumes less power mainly due to running the processor at 2Mhz opposed to 4Mhz on the GX.

Despite the GX running at twice the processor speed the average speed increase is only ~40% over an SX.
The power required to keep the ram alive in the HP48GX and SX is tiny. Current draw in coma mode is almost negligible.

> But it'd be fair to calculate battery life not just based on look at
> how much power is drawn for serial transmission, but rather by how much
> power is used given your average use case. The 50G is anywhere between
> three and seven times as fast as the 48GX, and the 48GX is between two
> and three times as fast as the 48SX.

The Hp50G draws significantly more power when preforming many of the other actions in the table as well not just serial IO. However I quoted the serial power requirement cause it was my intention to point out that the HP48SX, and for that matter the 48GX and 49G as well are better suited for serial IO applications.

Would like to know where you got those figures? Everything I've come across claims the GX is only 40% faster than the SX, but has over twice the power requirements.

> It's also fair to compare the 50G
> to the 48GX / SX with cards in both slots. This increases its power
> consumption by quite a bit at all times.

Yes good point this adds a ~1mA, considering the 50g needs 77-82mA to read flash ROM this in comparison isn't that much.

> In the off state, the 48GX
> draws (per your references) almost a milliamp with two cards.

The references states 1/10th mA in the off state. However I assume what's being quoted is the cards coin cell current draw. With modern cards this number should be much less.

See section 6.22:
http://www.hpcalc.org/hp48/docs/faq/48faq-6.html

Would like to hear from anyone if they know if the card draws from the calcs main batteries when off.

> The 50G
> draws essentially nothing. If your calculator sits in a drawer, being
> used only occasionally, this could be the difference between dead
> batteries and living ones.

We're talking about 1/10th mA and I have my doubts that it's referring to the main calcs batteries. Newer cards will most likely require even less to keep the mem alive. Even on the old cards the coin cells last quite a long time.

>
> Because the 50G calculates anywhere between 10-30 times faster than the
> 48SX, and with C programs possibly thousands of times as fast, your
> peak draw during a calculation is of course higher, but the average
> draw over time, and represented by power consumed per math problem
> worked, is likely to be much lower. Your productivity is also likely
> to be enhanced, as difficult problems will take much less time.

Yes I know and agree the 50G trounces the SX in math calculations etc.. etc...
My point was to point out that older calculators still do some things better, one being serial IO, two being longer operation on a set of batteries. (I know USB etc.. etc.., but I do not intend to keep a powered USB port by my side at all times, hence the usefulness of battery life.)

> If power consumption on a single set of batteris is your ultimate test,
> it's hard to argue against the HP48SX.

It isn't the ultimate, but can be important depending on your use.

> But if you look at it as a
> function of mathematical work done per set of batteries, the 50G is
> probably better and if you add in the productivity gains from having
> your calculations done much more quickly, the newer machine looks even
> better.

The Hp50G is a great machine, but I can't agree that it completely replaces the older series. Also miss the ability to use all the great IR programs on the 50G. Each model has its pros and cons. I prefer the older key layout and use the serial port. If I need to calculate pi to 1000 digits I'll grab my 50g, but for most of my uses the SX is plenty of power.

[Oregonian Haruspex]

I only got my 50G earlier this fall, but I still haven't drained the
charge from the Eneloops I put in there when I bought it. I don't use
it all the time, but it is always handy and while I'm sure my 48G will
last longer on a set of batteries (especially considering that I sprang
for lithium cells) I am pretty impressed with the battery life of the
50G anyway.

The 48's a great machine, I agree, and there are some nits to pick with
the 50G (such as the rearranged keyboard, and the fact that the screen
isn't tilted toward the user) but in all I am very much happier with
the 50G.

Perhaps HP is listening, and will eventually put the 50G in a new case
that more closely resembles the 48 series, but I doubt it.