Why is the "HP's Industry departure" wrt calculator devices such a tragedy?
e
I used to use an HP 48SX during my engineering studies, and sold it later
when I felt that I was not using it to its capability. Given that it was a
fairly expensive item, it was the right decision at the time.
Recently a friend reminded me about the machines when he asked for advice
about which model to buy. Along the way, and looking for some info, I came
across www.hpcalc.org which I was previously unaware of, and read the
article about "HP's Industry departure"
I see that I am not alone in my disappointment at the closure of such an
innovative operation. I have the impression that many would agree that the
HP devices are simply the best that have ever been to date.
In discussing the "end of life" of the HP calculator devices, with other
people, it has been said to me (by the uneducated?) that a computer is but a
glorified calculator, and maybe it is just a case of evolution, where
calculators are being replaced by computers and PDA's.
So...after that long background and introduction, I come to the point of
this posting....
I assume many would agree that there is a significant difference between an
HP48/49 series device, and say, a palm pilot, or Jornada. But what exactly
is it? I have a few ideas, but I would be interested to hear some other
opinions.
1. Function specific? An HP calculator device is a function specific device,
and is perfectly (and I mean perfectly) designed to deliver the answer,
compared to a PDA which is always a make do, with a multi purpose device
trying to offer many different specific functionalities.
2. Ergonomics? A handheld calculator with proper keys, works a lot better
than trying to make a touchscreen on a PDA pretend to be keys. It is
affected by resolution, the flat surface with no texture, and so on.
3. Ease of customisation? An HP can be programmed on the spot. A PDA needs
to have code written somewhere else (in C or J2ME) and then uploaded. I am
sure that this will change with time, but for now it is not so simple.
I look forward to some other opinions in this newsgroup.
Thanks
Richard Garner
A calculator allows you to do specific down and dirty calculations on the
spot. PDAs and computers either weigh too much of do too little for field
work.
<e> wrote in message news:3cc6c918$0$2...@hades.is.co.za...
W
times I need Matlab or another computer program. I daily need a calculator,
and very important with RPN, and this is possible only using Hp
calculators.
Helen
> innovative operation. I have the impression that many would agree that the
> HP devices are simply the best that have ever been to date.
They used to be the best handheld calculators, up to the HP 48 series
anyway. After that, I am not so sure.
> I assume many would agree that there is a significant difference between an
> HP48/49 series device, and say, a palm pilot, or Jornada.
That is obvious, they are entirely different animals.
> 1. Function specific? An HP calculator device is a function specific device,
> and is perfectly (and I mean perfectly) designed to deliver the answer,
Ideally that is correct, but this would be correct for any
well-designed device.
Also, I am not so sure inhowfar that would be true, e.g., for the HP
49G. The misguided emphasis on a relatively sophisticated CAS (which
nobody in his right mind would ever want to use for anything but toy
problems, and for which no decent documentation exists anyway...) has
blurred the focus very significantly. Thus, the 49G is a product
without a market, and has met the fate of all products of that kind...
I should also say that ACO is only partially to blame for this. A
large part of the problem lies in the simple fact that HP's
traditional market in engineering has simply disappeared, through no
fault of HP, I might add.
> compared to a PDA which is always a make do, with a multi purpose device
> trying to offer many different specific functionalities.
That is patently false. Just like pocket calculators, PDAs are
optimized for a certain purpose, just a different one than
calculators.
> 2. Ergonomics? A handheld calculator with proper keys, works a lot better
> than trying to make a touchscreen on a PDA pretend to be keys. It is
> affected by resolution, the flat surface with no texture, and so on.
A well-designed PDA works well for this purpose. A calculator
generally makes a lousy PDA, existing PDA packages for HP and other
calculators notwithstanding.
> 3. Ease of customisation? An HP can be programmed on the spot. A PDA needs
> to have code written somewhere else (in C or J2ME) and then uploaded.
Not true at all. Most of the Psion/Symbian PDAs can be programmed
quite nicely. You can even run Linux on them, and program in C++ if
that is what you want.
> I look forward to some other opinions in this newsgroup.
What is your point? As I said, calculators and PDAs are entirely
different devices. Of course, both are computers, but that is
essentially where the commonalities end.
Veli-Pekka Nousiainen
news:1a8f5fe5.02042...@posting.google.com...X
> > 2. Ergonomics? A handheld calculator with proper keys, works a lot
better
> > than trying to make a touchscreen on a PDA pretend to be keys. It is
> > affected by resolution, the flat surface with no texture, and so on.
>
> A well-designed PDA works well for this purpose. A calculator
> generally makes a lousy PDA, existing PDA packages for HP and other
> calculators notwithstanding.
and a PDA makes a lousy calculator...
> > 3. Ease of customisation? An HP can be programmed on the spot. A PDA
needs
> > to have code written somewhere else (in C or J2ME) and then uploaded.
>
> Not true at all. Most of the Psion/Symbian PDAs can be programmed
> quite nicely. You can even run Linux on them, and program in C++ if
> that is what you want.
Only Psion series 3 has a nicely integrated programming language
which can also be used to create new functions for the calculator
application.
> > I look forward to some other opinions in this newsgroup.
>
> What is your point? As I said, calculators and PDAs are entirely
> different devices. Of course, both are computers, but that is
> essentially where the commonalities end.
Take it easy PDA-lady, I have a Philips Velo 500 (old B&W PDA)
and an HP Jornada 720 plus an HP 700LX Omnigo with Nokia GSM.
AND an old Shard PDA, which I don't use anymore...
Veli-Pekka
Michael
I am just curious to see how other people understand it.
My summary of your reply...
- So the HP49 did not live up to your expectations then?
- I agree with your comment that the PDA and the calulator are optimised for
different purposes.
But then my question is: Are the claims made by some, that calculators will
become defunct by the evolution of the PDA, correct? You're indicating that
they are different devices, whereas some claim they wil become the same
device. Is this possible?
- I agree that these devices can all be programmed. OS's and JVM's make them
attractive. But is it an issue that certain devices require more programming
effort (C/C++/J2ME/etc) to customise, than others (HP48/49)?
Cheers
Nick Karagiaouroglou
> <e> wrote in message news:<3cc6c918$0$2...@hades.is.co.za>...
> > I see that I am not alone in my disappointment at the closure of such an
> > innovative operation. I have the impression that many would agree that the
> > HP devices are simply the best that have ever been to date.
>
> They used to be the best handheld calculators, up to the HP 48 series
> anyway. After that, I am not so sure.
>
> > I assume many would agree that there is a significant difference between an
> > HP48/49 series device, and say, a palm pilot, or Jornada.
>
> That is obvious, they are entirely different animals.
>
> > 1. Function specific? An HP calculator device is a function specific device,
> > and is perfectly (and I mean perfectly) designed to deliver the answer,
>
> Ideally that is correct, but this would be correct for any
> well-designed device.
> Also, I am not so sure inhowfar that would be true, e.g., for the HP
> 49G. The misguided emphasis on a relatively sophisticated CAS (which
> nobody in his right mind would ever want to use for anything but toy
> problems, and for which no decent documentation exists anyway...)
Documentation again ;-) But as for the "toy problems", well I can't
agree. The problems which can be solved with the current CAS are
themselves by no means "toy problems". For example with the HP49G you
can easily make a Hückel matrix and find Eigenstates of some molecules
directly out of the box. In addition, we can see the current CAS as
the first step into a new generation of handheld devices with CAS
built-in, designed especially for scientists/technicians etc. Perhaps
we are at a new trial and error phase, which hopefully will show what
the "ideal design" of such devices is.
> has
> blurred the focus very significantly. Thus, the 49G is a product
> without a market, and has met the fate of all products of that kind...
Well, a little bit of a market must exist, or else what are we doing
here? ;-)
> I should also say that ACO is only partially to blame for this. A
> large part of the problem lies in the simple fact that HP's
> traditional market in engineering has simply disappeared, through no
> fault of HP, I might add.
I don't get that. There must be engineers around, a lot of them.
> > compared to a PDA which is always a make do, with a multi purpose device
> > trying to offer many different specific functionalities.
>
> That is patently false. Just like pocket calculators, PDAs are
> optimized for a certain purpose, just a different one than
> calculators.
>
> > 2. Ergonomics? A handheld calculator with proper keys, works a lot better
> > than trying to make a touchscreen on a PDA pretend to be keys. It is
> > affected by resolution, the flat surface with no texture, and so on.
>
> A well-designed PDA works well for this purpose. A calculator
> generally makes a lousy PDA, existing PDA packages for HP and other
> calculators notwithstanding.
Hmm, "well-designed" is unfortunately something that doesn't appear
often nowadays. Look how quick the generations of models hunt one
another. No time to carefully design something.
> > 3. Ease of customisation? An HP can be programmed on the spot. A PDA needs
> > to have code written somewhere else (in C or J2ME) and then uploaded.
>
> Not true at all. Most of the Psion/Symbian PDAs can be programmed
> quite nicely. You can even run Linux on them, and program in C++ if
> that is what you want.
Hmm, a bit hard to predict which programming language will best serve,
say, an engineer. To me the more or less identical usage of commands
in programming and in "direct execution" is a big advantage.
> > I look forward to some other opinions in this newsgroup.
>
> What is your point? As I said, calculators and PDAs are entirely
> different devices. Of course, both are computers, but that is
> essentially where the commonalities end.
Greetings,
Nick.
J.Manrique Lopez de la Fuente
> "Helen" <GHMoh...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1a8f5fe5.02042...@posting.google.com...
> > <e> wrote in message news:<3cc6c918$0$2...@hades.is.co.za>...
> X
> > > 2. Ergonomics? A handheld calculator with proper keys, works a lot
> better
> > > than trying to make a touchscreen on a PDA pretend to be keys. It is
> > > affected by resolution, the flat surface with no texture, and so on.
> >
> > A well-designed PDA works well for this purpose. A calculator
> > generally makes a lousy PDA, existing PDA packages for HP and other
> > calculators notwithstanding.
>
> and a PDA makes a lousy calculator...
>
The eternal discussion.. A pocket size pc is that, a personal
computer, not a calculator.. Perhaps a new kind of handheld or pocket
pc machines would be a step beyond nowdays handheld calculators.. The
hardware is available, the development must be done in software area
to improve OS, apps,.. to make a specific handheld pc (or pocket size
pc) well designed for math and engineers..
> > > 3. Ease of customisation? An HP can be programmed on the spot. A PDA
> needs
> > > to have code written somewhere else (in C or J2ME) and then uploaded.
> >
> > Not true at all. Most of the Psion/Symbian PDAs can be programmed
> > quite nicely. You can even run Linux on them, and program in C++ if
> > that is what you want.
>
> Only Psion series 3 has a nicely integrated programming language
> which can also be used to create new functions for the calculator
> application.
>
Yes, but linux pocket pc with python (already available) is nice.. and
if it include an app that could be programmed via scripts .. it would
be nice.. Have anybody test Giac/Xcas from Bernard Parisse? ;-)
> > > I look forward to some other opinions in this newsgroup.
> >
> > What is your point? As I said, calculators and PDAs are entirely
> > different devices. Of course, both are computers, but that is
> > essentially where the commonalities end.
>
> Take it easy PDA-lady, I have a Philips Velo 500 (old B&W PDA)
> and an HP Jornada 720 plus an HP 700LX Omnigo with Nokia GSM.
> AND an old Shard PDA, which I don't use anymore...
>
I have a HP Jornada525 and a iPaq3100 with linux inside to test
Xcas_ipaq version, and it beats my hp49 in some fields, but it is
still to early to compare both systems (linux handheld with Xcas and
Hp49), but it is a step..
The future could bring us specific calculators for students (cheaper
than nowdays models) and some kind of handheld pc (pocket pc size)
with linux as OS where you could use great math tools (like Xcas) and
others that could be great for PIM, programming,.. and these should be
cheaper than nowdays pocketpc models..
Maybe I am a dreamer, but sure I am not the only one.. That's the
reason I am helping Parisse with Xcas, at least all the little help I
can bring (not all I would like), because I think this is a great
tool, that will be a reference in future Engineering & Math Handheld
Devices (my EMHD dream).
Just an opinion..
J.Manrique
CdU de la ETSIG
Helen
Absolutely, I agree.
> Only Psion series 3 has a nicely integrated programming language
> which can also be used to create new functions for the calculator
> application.
The Series 5 has that as well, I think.
> Take it easy PDA-lady,
??? Whatever earned me that designation? And, I was, in fact, quite at
ease when I wrote my post.
> I have a Philips Velo 500 (old B&W PDA)
> and an HP Jornada 720 plus an HP 700LX Omnigo with Nokia GSM.
> AND an old Shard PDA, which I don't use anymore...
So?
Re-reading this thread it occurs to me that maybe the point was to pit
PDAs against calculators, and that the original poster's idea may have
been that HP's demise was brought about by the rise of PDAs. That, of
course, is complete nonsense. PDAs are used for entirely different
purposes and they do not compete in the marketplace.
Veli-Pekka Nousiainen
news:<aa88jf$n05$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi>...
> > and a PDA makes a lousy calculator...
>
> Absolutely, I agree.
>
> > Only Psion series 3 has a nicely integrated programming language
> > which can also be used to create new functions for the calculator
> > application.
>
> The Series 5 has that as well, I think.
Not like the Series 3. Check it out!
> > Take it easy PDA-lady,
>
> ??? Whatever earned me that designation? And, I was, in fact, quite at
> ease when I wrote my post.
Apologies!
I thought you would be just bashing HP 49G...sorry!
> > I have a Philips Velo 500 (old B&W PDA)
> > and an HP Jornada 720 plus an HP 700LX Omnigo with Nokia GSM.
> > AND an old Shard PDA, which I don't use anymore...
>
> So?
Just to let everybody know that I use hammers and screwdrivers as well
so not everything looks like a nail to me...
> Re-reading this thread it occurs to me that maybe the point was to pit
> PDAs against calculators, and that the original poster's idea may have
> been that HP's demise was brought about by the rise of PDAs. That, of
> course, is complete nonsense. PDAs are used for entirely different
> purposes and they do not compete in the marketplace.
I agree...
Veli-Pekka
No Spam
> > large part of the problem lies in the simple fact that HP's
> > traditional market in engineering has simply disappeared, through no
> > fault of HP, I might add.
>
> I don't get that. There must be engineers around, a lot of them.
>
"Engineers" today largely perform clerical duties....they have no need for
anything beyond a 4 function arithmetic calculator, if that.
Eigenvalues, Fourier Series, vector operations, sparse matrices, Weibull,
heat transfer, S-parameters, etc., etc. ---- primarily academic curiosities
for those in university.
Darryl Okahata
> - I agree with your comment that the PDA and the calulator are optimised for
> different purposes.
Well, the issue is that, now that ACO is dead, what do you do? Buy
a TI? Buy a laptop?
I guess the answer depends on what you do:
* If you don't use the symbolic math or other advanced features, any of
a number of non-HP calculators will probably do.
[ Well, when ACO was terminated, I went out and bought four more HP
calculators, which should (hopefully ;-) last longer than me. ;-) ]
* If you want HP48/49-like symbolic math capabilities, use a laptop or
desktop. Maxima, a very nice computer algebra system (w/symbolic
integration, 3D plotting, and an ODE solver), has been GPL'd, and is
now freely available for a number of systems -- Windows included. For
more info, check out:
http://Maxima.sourceforge.net/
It's supposedly fairly stable, but does contain some bugs.
[ However, users of Symmetries will be annoyed (or pleasantly
surprised) to find that the chapter on Symmetries is in French. ;-) ]
* If you really need something portable, some PDA-based solution is
going to be your only choice (unless you buy a TI). PDAs are slowly
becoming more and more powerful, and it's only been recently where you
can get a tantalyzing glimpse of what's possible.
[ Basically, someone's ported Maxima (without plotting/graphs) to a
PDA. While it's there, functionally, it's not particularly usable
because of the typing required to enter equations, not to mention
the occasional PDA-specific bug or two. Unfortunately, the PDA
source code for Maxima has since been lost, although it can be
recreated (straightforwardly, but tediously -- it's a long story). ]
--
Darryl Okahata
dar...@soco.agilent.com
DISCLAIMER: this message is the author's personal opinion and does not
constitute the support, opinion, or policy of Agilent Technologies, or
of the little green men that have been following him all day.
Helen
> agree. The problems which can be solved with the current CAS are
> themselves by no means "toy problems". For example with the HP49G you
> can easily make a Hückel matrix and find Eigenstates of some molecules
> directly out of the box.
That's very nice, but you missed the operative phrase "nobody in his
right mind would want to". Who would want to poke around on a crappy
little keyboard (yup, the keyboard, too...) and squint at a tiny
calculator screen for anything even approaching a serious math
problem? Other than the about a dozen or so HP-calculator addicts that
regularly meet in this group ;-)
Seriously, if you need Computer Algebra, you use Maple or Mathematica
or similar packages that run on real computers, and not a puny little
calculator, period. Being able to do these things on a "pocket"
calculator may be cute, but it is of next to no practical value. And
that is not only because you have to be a personal friend of Avenar,
Parisse, et alia in order to be considered worthy of knowing what it
actually is that this HP49G CAS can do ...
> Well, a little bit of a market must exist, or else what are we doing
> here? ;-)
Oh, certainly, a market of maybe O(100) users worldwide. Obviously,
that market is not sufficient to support the development (and maybe
not even the continued production; we shall see)of such a device. How
often do you see an HP49 in any store at all? You can still by
HP48GXs, though...
> I don't get that. There must be engineers around, a lot of them.
But they do not need nor use programmable calculators anymore. There
used to be a time when an HP 41 was the standard equipment that any
engineer in a design or analysis department was given on his/her first
day. Although, at least in larger companies, there was also some more
powerful computing machinery available, engineers used these things
day in and day out. Now, they all can carry a 2GHz CPU with 1GB of
memory and a 60GB hard drive in their briefcase (and I am only
slightly exaggerating here), and that's what they use for the more
sophisticated calculations. Yes, they still use pocket calculators
every now and then, but if they do, a $10 non-programmable scientific
calculator will do quite well, thank you.
> Hmm, "well-designed" is unfortunately something that doesn't appear
> often nowadays. Look how quick the generations of models hunt one
> another. No time to carefully design something.
Well, the basic design of the Palm PCs seems to have been very
successful, and has not significantly changed for quite a few years.
> Hmm, a bit hard to predict which programming language will best serve,
> say, an engineer. To me the more or less identical usage of commands
> in programming and in "direct execution" is a big advantage.
Many computing environments on PCs/Macs give you that, too.
Helen
I had no expectations, my 48 was serving me nicely for what I needed
it for. However, comparing the 49 to the former, I think it was a step
backwards.
> But then my question is: Are the claims made by some, that calculators will
> become defunct by the evolution of the PDA, correct?
As I said, that's complete nonsense. PDAs have nothing to do with the
demise of high-end programmable calculators. See my other posts.
Neill McKay
> "Engineers" today largely perform clerical duties....they have no need
> for anything beyond a 4 function arithmetic calculator, if that.
My Iron Ring and I disagree.
Neill McKay (proud used of a 49G for a variety of engineering tasks)
Veli-Pekka Nousiainen
> Seriously, if you need Computer Algebra, you use Maple or Mathematica
> or similar packages that run on real computers, and not a puny little
> calculator, period. Being able to do these things on a "pocket"
> calculator may be cute, but it is of next to no practical value. And
> that is not only because you have to be a personal friend of Avenar,
> Parisse, et alia in order to be considered worthy of knowing what it
> actually is that this HP49G CAS can do ...
The situation may be different in schools.
I've given lectures on using the 49G - because I was asked to !!
> > Well, a little bit of a market must exist, or else what are we doing
> > here? ;-)
>
> Oh, certainly, a market of maybe O(100) users worldwide. Obviously,
> that market is not sufficient to support the development (and maybe
> not even the continued production; we shall see)of such a device. How
> often do you see an HP49 in any store at all? You can still by
> HP48GXs, though...
X
Only 100 sold and in use worldwide?
There are more users in Finland than this amount !!!
So I suppose that everyone in this NG might be a Finn...;-)
I think you style IS provocative. To be more precise:
It looks like you take your personal opinions as a common fact?!
Any comments/corrections?!
with best regards, Veli-Pekka
Darryl Okahata
> "Helen" <GHMoh...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> > Oh, certainly, a market of maybe O(100) users worldwide. Obviously,
> > that market is not sufficient to support the development (and maybe
> > not even the continued production; we shall see)of such a device. How
> > often do you see an HP49 in any store at all? You can still by
> > HP48GXs, though...
> X
> Only 100 sold and in use worldwide?
> There are more users in Finland than this amount !!!
> So I suppose that everyone in this NG might be a Finn...;-)
Regardless of how you feel (or I or anyone else), Helen is close to
the point: given probable technological trends, it's becoming difficult
to successfully develop and sell a specialized calculator like the
HP49G, because:
* Laptops are becoming smaller and cheaper.
* PDAs are becoming faster and better (although not yet cheap -- fast
ones are still 1/3 to 1/2 the cost of a low-cost laptop).
Today, students are likely to have a desktop computer, and many have a
laptop. This is especially true for scientific and engineering
students. Toss in "free" CAS software like Maxima, or, perhaps,
inexpensive "student versions" of Mathematica, Maple, etc., and the
market for something like the HP49G shrinks -- not to mention that the
desktop/laptop will run a lot faster, have a better input system (a real
keyboard & mouse), and be able to do a lot more.
At this point, specialized CAS calculators still have the advantages
of being highly portable, of having specialized keyboards, and of having
long battery life.
However, because PDAs are becoming faster/better, it's now possible
to port Maxima to a PDA. Someone's actually already done a basic Maxima
port to a PDA, and "Maxima on a PDA" shows a lot of potential. It's not
(yet) particularly usable, though, as it really needs a real keyboard;
for example, try entering the following on a PDA:
integrate(1/(1+x^3),x);
Possible, but messy. Now, if you add some kind of calculator-like GUI
for the PDA, which then talks to Maxima (in place of the keyboard),
you've got the beginnings of a possible replacement for the HP49G. Note
that full sources to Maxima are available; if you want to fix bugs, or
hack new features, you can do it. Today.
At this point, the only problem (aside from battery life) is that
the PDA's touch-sensitive screen probably isn't designed for heavy
"calculator use", or for situations where you need to press keys quickly
*and* accurately (e.g., on exams -- maybe). So the big question is:
given the number of people who cannot use laptops or PDAs as CAS
systems, is that number large enough to support the development of
specialized CAS calculators for the forseeable future?
Note that I'm not saying that CAS calculators will die an
immediate death. I'll take a wild guess and say that TI's advanced
calculators will live for at least another 3-5 years; however, I
wouldn't bet that they'll last beyond that. They might, but I wouldn't
bet on it.
Comments? Am I missing something?
Jean-Yves Avenard
"Helen" <GHMoh...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1a8f5fe5.02042...@posting.google.com...
>
> That's very nice, but you missed the operative phrase "nobody in his
> right mind would want to". Who would want to poke around on a crappy
> little keyboard (yup, the keyboard, too...) and squint at a tiny
> calculator screen for anything even approaching a serious math
> problem? Other than the about a dozen or so HP-calculator addicts that
> regularly meet in this group ;-)
>
You sound just like Mr Marchel... I wonder if he had a "special" surgery
lately
Jean-Yves
rcobo
how about a PDA made for math and science?
that is a PDA with calculator keyboard and connectivity for
instruments to gather data. make it linux an d let the snowball roll.
wouldn't that sell?
regards
Darryl Okahata <dar...@soco.agilent.com> wrote in message news:<vwu1pzi...@mina.soco.agilent.com>...
Darryl Okahata
> how about a PDA made for math and science?
> that is a PDA with calculator keyboard and connectivity for
> instruments to gather data. make it linux an d let the snowball roll.
> wouldn't that sell?
My gut feel is, "no". While it would sell (and there is definitely
a market for this), I don't think it would sell enough to make any
money. More specialized products would be cheaper and easier to
produce. My (wild) guess is that the data gatherers want something that
is cheap, reliable/rugged, high-capacity, and flexible (able to accept
data from a variety of sources, and be able to transfer the data
quickly). For some applications, a keyboard/display is desirable (for
an operator to push a button), but not always needed.
Palms and WinCEs (e.g., Ipaq) dominate the market. The Sharp
Zaurus runs Linux, and has a lot of potential, but it currently has a
number of "issues" (which will, hopefully, be addressed, but that
remains to be seen).
Michael
one issue.
Helen is saying ...
> "As I said, that's complete nonsense. PDAs have nothing to do with the
> demise of high-end programmable calculators. See my other posts."
And Darryl is saying that
> At this point, the only problem (aside from battery life) is that
> the PDA's touch-sensitive screen probably isn't designed for heavy
> "calculator use", or for situations where you need to press keys quickly
> *and* accurately (e.g., on exams -- maybe). So the big question is:
> given the number of people who cannot use laptops or PDAs as CAS
> systems, is that number large enough to support the development of
> specialized CAS calculators for the forseeable future?
>
> Note that I'm not saying that CAS calculators will die an
> immediate death. I'll take a wild guess and say that TI's advanced
> calculators will live for at least another 3-5 years; however, I
> wouldn't bet that they'll last beyond that. They might, but I wouldn't
> bet on it.
Imagine in a utopia world, one had
- an extremely powerful handheld device,
- with Gb's of RAM
- and processing speed faster than anything available today in any form
whatsoever.
- a perfect touchscreen with high resolution,
- where the screen doubled as the keyboard (like a palm pilot)
Would it work, or what does it lack?
I am suspecting that the need for something handheld and the need for
something with a large display are mutually esxclusive at this moment.
Cheers
Michael
Nick Karagiaouroglou
> > >A
> > > large part of the problem lies in the simple fact that HP's
> > > traditional market in engineering has simply disappeared, through no
> > > fault of HP, I might add.
> >
> > I don't get that. There must be engineers around, a lot of them.
> >
>
> "Engineers" today largely perform clerical duties....they have no need for
> anything beyond a 4 function arithmetic calculator, if that.
Clerical? But who is performing the calculations instead?
> Eigenvalues, Fourier Series, vector operations, sparse matrices, Weibull,
> heat transfer, S-parameters, etc., etc. ---- primarily academic curiosities
> for those in university.
If these academical curiosities wouldn't exist, we would presumably
not have even an abacus. The development of new cars, bridges,
buildings, machines, computers etc, etc, goes hand in hand with the
development of and investigation with such mathematical tools.
Greetings,
Nick.
Nick Karagiaouroglou
> "No Spam" <nos...@att.com> wrote:
>
> > "Engineers" today largely perform clerical duties....they have no need
> > for anything beyond a 4 function arithmetic calculator, if that.
>
> My Iron Ring and I disagree.
Add me, my Loudspeakers and some effects for e-guitar to the club :-)
> Neill McKay (proud used of a 49G for a variety of engineering tasks)
Greetings,
Nick.
Nick Karagiaouroglou
> > agree. The problems which can be solved with the current CAS are
> > themselves by no means "toy problems". For example with the HP49G you
> > can easily make a Hückel matrix and find Eigenstates of some molecules
> > directly out of the box.
>
> That's very nice, but you missed the operative phrase "nobody in his
> right mind would want to". Who would want to poke around on a crappy
> little keyboard (yup, the keyboard, too...) and squint at a tiny
> calculator screen for anything even approaching a serious math
> problem? Other than the about a dozen or so HP-calculator addicts that
> regularly meet in this group ;-)
These are things that can be improved. The HP49G is of course not a
"flag-ship" of mathematical tools. But it can serve as a start, for
further development.
> Seriously, if you need Computer Algebra, you use Maple or Mathematica
> or similar packages that run on real computers, and not a puny little
> calculator, period.
There is (was?) already a casiopeia with maple software, which shows
that bigger screens, better hard/software are (technically) possible.
Why not having such a professional instrument, like mathematica, in
your pocket?
> Being able to do these things on a "pocket"
> calculator may be cute, but it is of next to no practical value. And
> that is not only because you have to be a personal friend of Avenar,
> Parisse, et alia in order to be considered worthy of knowing what it
> actually is that this HP49G CAS can do ...
Oh, come on now. Captain Avenard, Prof. Parisse and the rest of the
crue know only just a few of the people here, but when they can help,
then they always do. Even if some "Nicks" around here are fuming from
time to time because of some "unexpected behavior". ;-)
> > Well, a little bit of a market must exist, or else what are we doing
> > here? ;-)
>
> Oh, certainly, a market of maybe O(100) users worldwide. Obviously,
> that market is not sufficient to support the development (and maybe
> not even the continued production; we shall see)of such a device. How
> often do you see an HP49 in any store at all? You can still by
> HP48GXs, though...
Hmm, isn't that because the 48's were designed, produced and marketed
with the "older HP-way" which unfortunately vanished when the 49 was
new born? For example in the times of the 48, I saw much more
commercials for it in magazines, than for the 49 today (or a couple of
years ago). I don't have any idea about marketing, it only *seems* to
me that HP didn't care much if it gets widely known or not.
> > I don't get that. There must be engineers around, a lot of them.
>
> But they do not need nor use programmable calculators anymore. There
> used to be a time when an HP 41 was the standard equipment that any
> engineer in a design or analysis department was given on his/her first
> day. Although, at least in larger companies, there was also some more
> powerful computing machinery available, engineers used these things
> day in and day out. Now, they all can carry a 2GHz CPU with 1GB of
> memory and a 60GB hard drive in their briefcase (and I am only
> slightly exaggerating here), and that's what they use for the more
> sophisticated calculations. Yes, they still use pocket calculators
> every now and then, but if they do, a $10 non-programmable scientific
> calculator will do quite well, thank you.
I guess you mean that you carry your laptop with mathematica, or
similar software. Well yes, there are much more powerful instruments
than the calculators of today, let them be with or without CAS. But
imagine a very very small weight package with good hardware and
mathematica (or any other "bigger" package.) Imagine it easily
programmable, flexible and with long battery life. Wouldn't that be a
good thing?
> > Hmm, "well-designed" is unfortunately something that doesn't appear
> > often nowadays. Look how quick the generations of models hunt one
> > another. No time to carefully design something.
>
> Well, the basic design of the Palm PCs seems to have been very
> successful, and has not significantly changed for quite a few years.
That's true. Nonetheless I can't get rid of the feeling that it is not
the best possible design that always wins. Many factors in play a role
for success. The design and implementation of Newton was much better,
but Newton flopped.
> > Hmm, a bit hard to predict which programming language will best serve,
> > say, an engineer. To me the more or less identical usage of commands
> > in programming and in "direct execution" is a big advantage.
>
> Many computing environments on PCs/Macs give you that, too.
I can't take my Mac with me. The PowerBook fits better, but sitting in
a train and travelling around here makes it also a real problem. It
may be much smaller than a desktop, but it is still too big, for
really easy operation.
Greetings,
Nick.
P.S. I must also admit that you are (at least partially) right. A big
part of the (my) interest for calculators with CAS is simply the
result of "I like them". ;-)
Nick Karagiaouroglou
> Only 100 sold and in use worldwide?
> There are more users in Finland than this amount !!!
> So I suppose that everyone in this NG might be a Finn...;-)
In reality my name is Veli-Niko Karagiaouroglainen. ;-)
> I think you style IS provocative. To be more precise:
> It looks like you take your personal opinions as a common fact?!
>
> Any comments/corrections?!
>
> with best regards, Veli-Pekka
Perhaps we should not only compare the power the current
CAS-calculators with the power of a desktop with Mathematica, but
think if such a software package can be put in a (hypothetical) future
calculator? (No, not one from HP, I mean Steen and Co. , or Rcobo)
Greetings,
Nick.
Veli-Pekka Nousiainen
news:3cc91061$0$2...@hades.is.co.za...
X
> Imagine in a utopia world, one had
> - an extremely powerful handheld device,
> - with Gb's of RAM
> - and processing speed faster than anything available today in any form
> whatsoever.
> - a perfect touchscreen with high resolution,
> - where the screen doubled as the keyboard (like a palm pilot)
>
> Would it work, or what does it lack?
a portable light-weight low-temperature thermonuclear reactor
heh-heh
VPN
Nick Karagiaouroglou
>
> > "Helen" <GHMoh...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >
> > > Oh, certainly, a market of maybe O(100) users worldwide. Obviously,
> > > that market is not sufficient to support the development (and maybe
> > > not even the continued production; we shall see)of such a device. How
> > > often do you see an HP49 in any store at all? You can still by
> > > HP48GXs, though...
> > X
> > Only 100 sold and in use worldwide?
> > There are more users in Finland than this amount !!!
> > So I suppose that everyone in this NG might be a Finn...;-)
>
> Regardless of how you feel (or I or anyone else), Helen is close to
> the point: given probable technological trends, it's becoming difficult
> to successfully develop and sell a specialized calculator like the
> HP49G, because:
>
> * Laptops are becoming smaller and cheaper.
>
> * PDAs are becoming faster and better (although not yet cheap -- fast
> ones are still 1/3 to 1/2 the cost of a low-cost laptop).
But a PDA with a good CAS software package and sophisticated input
system like "write your stuff on the screen", wouldn't that be a
CAS-calculator with another name? I think the usage defines the
machine, not its name.
> Today, students are likely to have a desktop computer, and many have a
> laptop. This is especially true for scientific and engineering
> students. Toss in "free" CAS software like Maxima, or, perhaps,
> inexpensive "student versions" of Mathematica, Maple, etc., and the
> market for something like the HP49G shrinks -- not to mention that the
> desktop/laptop will run a lot faster, have a better input system (a real
> keyboard & mouse), and be able to do a lot more.
>
> At this point, specialized CAS calculators still have the advantages
> of being highly portable, of having specialized keyboards, and of having
> long battery life.
The small calculator which you can simply hold in one hand ahs also
its big advantages. Key in some values or use the mouse of the laptop
while travelling. Then key in the same values or use the arrow keys of
the calculator. And to make it even better, do the above things while
standing in train because there is no free sit anywhere. And even even
better: make some measurements and save your data somewhere out there
in the forests, on the glacier, in a cave or anywhere else, where
there is no electricity, no desks, no shops for buing new batteries. A
small data logger and a good calc saved my day very often under such
circumstances.
> However, because PDAs are becoming faster/better, it's now possible
> to port Maxima to a PDA. Someone's actually already done a basic Maxima
> port to a PDA, and "Maxima on a PDA" shows a lot of potential. It's not
> (yet) particularly usable, though, as it really needs a real keyboard;
> for example, try entering the following on a PDA:
>
> integrate(1/(1+x^3),x);
>
> Possible, but messy. Now, if you add some kind of calculator-like GUI
> for the PDA, which then talks to Maxima (in place of the keyboard),
> you've got the beginnings of a possible replacement for the HP49G. Note
> that full sources to Maxima are available; if you want to fix bugs, or
> hack new features, you can do it. Today.
Well, I don't mind if nowadays it is called PDA. (Especially if it is
possible to get rid of the usual software that comes with them and
install some math package instead.)
> At this point, the only problem (aside from battery life) is that
> the PDA's touch-sensitive screen probably isn't designed for heavy
> "calculator use", or for situations where you need to press keys quickly
> *and* accurately (e.g., on exams -- maybe). So the big question is:
> given the number of people who cannot use laptops or PDAs as CAS
> systems, is that number large enough to support the development of
> specialized CAS calculators for the forseeable future?
I could imagine some good quality touch screen along with a good OCR
that can recognize mathematical input. Isn't that possible. (From the
technology side, I mean)
> Note that I'm not saying that CAS calculators will die an
> immediate death. I'll take a wild guess and say that TI's advanced
> calculators will live for at least another 3-5 years; however, I
> wouldn't bet that they'll last beyond that. They might, but I wouldn't
> bet on it.
>
> Comments? Am I missing something?
If they disappear, then something else will appear, that will have a
new name and more capabilities, but its "position in the collection of
tools" that we use, will be very close to the position that
calculators used to occupy.
Greetings,
Nick.
Veli-Pekka Nousiainen
news:cd9ca36b.02042...@posting.google.com...
> Darryl Okahata <dar...@soco.agilent.com> wrote in message
news:<vwu1pzi...@mina.soco.agilent.com>...
> > "Veli-Pekka Nousiainen" <DROP...@welho.com> writes:
> >
> > > "Helen" <GHMoh...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> But a PDA with a good CAS software package and sophisticated input
> system like "write your stuff on the screen", wouldn't that be a
> CAS-calculator with another name? I think the usage defines the
> machine, not its name.
We already almost had it: XP'nder
(using a more modern approach in naming conventions)
And that was design by the ACO Team...
VPN
Helen
> The situation may be different in schools.
That may well be true, but then, there are other considerations there.
I suspect that an HP49 would be significant overkill for a high-school
student, and it may also be outside the price range of many students.
Plus, at least in the US, TI (for the somewhat higher-end calculators,
and Casio and a bunch of others for the cheap ones) has a strong lead
in that market, while HP, traditionally providing high-end calculators
for professionals, has next to no presence in schools. I realize that
HP is (or was?) trying hard to move in that market, but as a general
rule it is very hard for a relative newcomer to replace an established
market leader. As I said, HP's traditional market was made up by
engineers and scientists, and that market has all but vanished.
> I've given lectures on using the 49G - because I was asked to !!
Very interesting. In high-schools? Schools in Finland must be quite a
bit different from the one in the US then. Mind you, I am talking
about the schools in my area, which are among the best in the nation
(and even the best in the world, according to recent TIMMS studies).
> Only 100 sold and in use worldwide?
Well, I hope you did understand that I was exaggerating. Of course
there are more than that, but the fact remains that the fraction is
minute compared to the one for other calculators.
> I think you style IS provocative. To be more precise:
> It looks like you take your personal opinions as a common fact?!
No, I don't think I do. I am trying to make careful observations, and
to draw as objective a conclusion as I can from them. Yes, I do
sometimes exaggerate to make a point, but only to provoke thought, not
to provoke a person. I apologize if I came across that way.
By the way, I think that much of what I said about the HP49 also holds
for the high-end TIs (TI89/92/Voyage 200): I simply don't see a
sufficient market for these things in the future.
As another data point, in some of my classes (e.g. in numerical
mathematics) I make regular surveys, asking students among other
things if they own a programmable calculator, which roughly 100% do,
and if they know how to prgram them, which typically about 10-20% do.
Think about it.
Helen
I agree with most of what you said, except perhaps your thoughts on a
possible role for PDAs. To me, just because these things have a
similar form factor than calculators, there is no reason to assume any
PDA will replace calculators in the future. All PDAs already have
basic calculators on them, yet hardly anybody who often uses a
calculator uses those. And if you really want to do Computer Algebra,
then the intermediate expressions can often become unwieldy even on a
computer screen, let alone on a PDA.
In my opinion, it is the notebooks (and subnotebooks) that the future
belongs to. Already there are some schools and colleges in the US that
require/provide notebook computers for all students. Also, as far as
the form factor is concerned, if you look at a "pocket calculator"
like the HP49, then the "pocket" is really a euphemism: you simply
cannot carry these things in a regular pocket. Thus, you will have to
stick it in your backpack or briefcase, and once you do that, you
might as well replace it with something the size of a small notebook
computer. Which will then also allow you to do your word processing,
web browsing (with wireless networks quickly becoming more and more
widespread), etc., etc.
Helen
> You sound just like Mr Marchel... I wonder if he had a "special" surgery
> lately
Well, do you have anything to contribute to this discussion, other
than a thinly-veiled (and somewhat weak) attempt at an insult?
Veli-Pekka Nousiainen
news:<aa9ke2$vi$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi>...
> sometimes exaggerate to make a point, but only to provoke thought, not
> to provoke a person. I apologize if I came across that way.
ok - it's your style to get opinions pouring in...I understand.
BTW
I agree on calc # PDA
Take care,
VPN
rcobo
how about a calculator-keyboard (HP48) that connects to a PDA? thinner
than an HP32sII and incorporated into a folding case. PDA on left and
keyboard on right. a micro reads the keys and sends it to the PDA
(like they current folding keyboards), except that this keyboard is a
copy of the HP48 keyboard. a software (in PDA) reads it and pastes it
to the stack on the EMU48/49. this keyboard could be reprogrammed for
other applications through the connector. the PDA could be the
pocket-loox running at 400 MHZ.
(price would be reasonable since it requieres little effort)
pocket loox:
http://www.pocketpccentral.net/fuj_ppcs.htm
regards
______________________________________________________________________
> how about a PDA made for math and science?
> that is a PDA with calculator keyboard and connectivity for
> instruments to gather data. make it linux an d let the snowball roll.
> wouldn't that sell?
My gut feel is, "no". While it would sell (and there is
definitely
a market for this), I don't think it would sell enough to make any
money. More specialized products would be cheaper and easier to
produce. My (wild) guess is that the data gatherers want something
that
is cheap, reliable/rugged, high-capacity, and flexible (able to accept
data from a variety of sources, and be able to transfer the data
quickly). For some applications, a keyboard/display is desirable (for
an operator to push a button), but not always needed.
Palms and WinCEs (e.g., Ipaq) dominate the market. The Sharp
Zaurus runs Linux, and has a lot of potential, but it currently has a
number of "issues" (which will, hopefully, be addressed, but that
remains to be seen).
--
Al Hughes
Dear Helen,
Let me tell you from a college students prospective on your
speculations. I own a nice laptop, and also a HP 48GX and HP 49 calcs.
I would much rather use the calcs than the laptops any day of the
week. They are more efficient in the job that they do and do NOT add
that much extra weight to my already overweight book back. The 48GX
with the right cards is more powerful than the palms or laptops simply
because that is what they were designed to do.
Remember that there has always been a spot for both and there always
will be. And as far as your suggestions that an engineer only needs a
four function calculator is crazy. I am am Electrical Enginnering and
Physics major and trust me when I say this, if I went into a test
without my HP 48GX I would probable fail. Lets say that test are now
designed with the calculator in mind.
I am glad that you seem to prefer the palm and that it works for you.
You are probably some liberal arts major that only walked by the
physics and math class because you were not required to have them. I
still say give me a good HP calc AND my laptop and I will win every
time.
Al
P.S. I bought my wife a palm for her job at Christmas and she loves it
for her job in the healthcare field. I looked into a palm for myself
and there was not enough support as far as programs go to justify the
added expense of purchasing one vs. using the HP that I already had
and purchasing a few mem cards and loading what I need from HPCALC.org
to them.
Helen
> There is (was?) already a casiopeia with maple software, which shows
> that bigger screens, better hard/software are (technically) possible.
I heard that rumour too, but I never saw one of these, neither in real
life, nor as an advertisement. I suspect it was just a rumour.
> Why not having such a professional instrument, like mathematica, in
> your pocket?
Because the screen is too small, and typing is too hard. My feeling is
that you are banging your head against a fundamental law of nature:
"CAS do not belong on handheld devices." ;-)
> Oh, come on now. Captain Avenard, Prof. Parisse and the rest of the
> crue know only just a few of the people here, but when they can help,
> then they always do. Even if some "Nicks" around here are fuming from
> time to time because of some "unexpected behavior". ;-)
I am sorry if the above remark gave rise to a misunderstanding: I was
criticizing neither of the two gentlemen; this was just another stab
at the lack of documentation, which is HP's (ACO's?) fault alone. I
notice that HP even removed the CAS reference manuals from their
website, in other words, were it not for hpcalc (and this newgroup)
the CAS would be completely undocumented. Trying to sell the
calculator without such a reference, and not having one available for
more than a year was a scandal to begin with...
> Hmm, isn't that because the 48's were designed, produced and marketed
> with the "older HP-way" which unfortunately vanished when the 49 was
> new born? For example in the times of the 48, I saw much more
> commercials for it in magazines, than for the 49 today (or a couple of
> years ago). I don't have any idea about marketing, it only *seems* to
> me that HP didn't care much if it gets widely known or not.
That could have played a role, too.
> I guess you mean that you carry your laptop with mathematica, or
> similar software. Well yes, there are much more powerful instruments
> than the calculators of today, let them be with or without CAS. But
> imagine a very very small weight package with good hardware and
> mathematica (or any other "bigger" package.) Imagine it easily
> programmable, flexible and with long battery life. Wouldn't that be a
> good thing?
Not if the screen is too small, see above. As I said, I think there is
some basic law at work: If you want to do work above a certain
complexity, then you need a user interface that can accommodate that,
with sufficient screen real estate and a sufficient number of keys,
which takes space, unless you can shrink people...
> That's true. Nonetheless I can't get rid of the feeling that it is not
> the best possible design that always wins. Many factors in play a role
> for success. The design and implementation of Newton was much better,
> but Newton flopped.
I never saw one of these, but from what I hear they simply did not
work as advertised (e.g. handwriting recognition). I think that was a
case of being too early with a good idea; the processors at that time
simply could not handle the demands that the Newton OS placed on them.
The Palms, on the other hand, worked well for all they were meant to
do from the outset.
> P.S. I must also admit that you are (at least partially) right. A big
> part of the (my) interest for calculators with CAS is simply the
> result of "I like them". ;-)
Actually, I like them too. But the fact that you and I and a couple of
others like them is not sufficient to make the product successful,
unfortunately.
J.Manrique Lopez de la Fuente
> that bigger screens, better hard/software are (technically) possible.
There was, and Maple doesn't have plans to update it..
> Why not having such a professional instrument, like mathematica, in
> your pocket?
>
Yes, why not.. And from many "hours" spend in internet surfing I found
a tool that could fit your expectatives:
http://www.intrinsyc.com/products/referencedesigns/cerfpda.asp
Processor – IntelŽStrongARM 1110 microprocessor (192 MHz)
Memory – 32 MB Flash memory (32-bit data bus width), 64 MB SDRAM
(96 MHz) 32-bit data bus width(128 MB SDRAM is a future population
option)
Power – On-board 7.4 V lithium-ion battery and switching power
supplies, battery monitor and battery charger, power-management
features (full power, idle, sleep), external 12 V wall adaptor
Display – 3.8” STN color LCD touchscreen with contrast and
brightness control
Data connectivity – 10Base-T Ethernet, full UART RS-232 port
(DB9 connector), Ericsson and SocketCom Bluetooth OEM module support,
IRDA transceiver (SIR & FIR), USB Slave port (Type II), PCMCIA types
I, II & III(3.3 V and 5 V)
Audio – Stereo sound output, mono input, on-board speaker and
microphone
Keypad – Alpha-numeric 35-key customizable keypad with LED
indicators for system boot and Ethernet activity (expandable to 50
keys)
Expansion Slot – Expansion connector allows additional hardware
to be developed and used without a main board re-spin (for example, a
second PCMCIA slot, additional serial ports, GPIO lines, additional
10Base-T Ethernet).
Expansion Card – JTAG, additional serial port, and GPIO lines
Size – 155 mm x 87 mm x 34 mm (without housing)
And it is as "cheap" as a laptop with Mathematica (perhaps a little
more).. Oh, I should say as a laptop with legal Mathematica..
Personally I don't know how much money can a student learn outside
Spain, but it seems that we are the more poor students in the world..
Most of you say that students carries laptops.. wow! .. so, only high
economics level contruies have this.. Just think in all the countries
around the world, how many of them would like to have a tool like a
handheld pc with all the capabilities of a CAS for the price of a hp49
calc???
> > Being able to do these things on a "pocket"
> > calculator may be cute, but it is of next to no practical value. And
> > that is not only because you have to be a personal friend of Avenar,
> > Parisse, et alia in order to be considered worthy of knowing what it
> > actually is that this HP49G CAS can do ...
>
Perhaps no practical value, but an hp49 is cheaper than a PC, now
think that handhelds can be done for the same price, this would be
third world door to computer world.. Probably most countries third
world countries can't earn money to buy a PC for every student at
class, but a cheap linux handheld could do more for them that a PC..
And speaking about "first world".. At my University we have several
classrooms for math with computer teaching, but there isn't enough
space for everybody.. so teachers can't spent enough time at them..
imagine how much can be done with a handheld at class with the right
software...
> > > I don't get that. There must be engineers around, a lot of them.
> >
> > But they do not need nor use programmable calculators anymore. There
> > used to be a time when an HP 41 was the standard equipment that any
> > engineer in a design or analysis department was given on his/her first
> > day. Although, at least in larger companies, there was also some more
> > powerful computing machinery available, engineers used these things
> > day in and day out. Now, they all can carry a 2GHz CPU with 1GB of
> > memory and a 60GB hard drive in their briefcase (and I am only
At what price? How many engineers around the world could afford for a
machine like that?? And students?
And you are talking about professional life.. so here it is the
funniest of all this. As a student we should learn all, but the tools
are for professionals, but the students don't know the tools untill
the leave university because they don't have money for them, ok the
university should provide them.. How much money should the university
spent?.. funny.
> > slightly exaggerating here), and that's what they use for the more
> > sophisticated calculations. Yes, they still use pocket calculators
> > every now and then, but if they do, a $10 non-programmable scientific
> > calculator will do quite well, thank you.
>
> I guess you mean that you carry your laptop with mathematica, or
> similar software. Well yes, there are much more powerful instruments
> than the calculators of today, let them be with or without CAS. But
Right, but again.. How much does it cost?
> imagine a very very small weight package with good hardware and
> mathematica (or any other "bigger" package.) Imagine it easily
> programmable, flexible and with long battery life. Wouldn't that be a
> good thing?
>
Good? This would be marvellous...
> > > Hmm, "well-designed" is unfortunately something that doesn't appear
> > > often nowadays. Look how quick the generations of models hunt one
> > > another. No time to carefully design something.
> >
> > Well, the basic design of the Palm PCs seems to have been very
> > successful, and has not significantly changed for quite a few years.
>
> That's true. Nonetheless I can't get rid of the feeling that it is not
> the best possible design that always wins. Many factors in play a role
> for success. The design and implementation of Newton was much better,
> but Newton flopped.
>
Right..
> P.S. I must also admit that you are (at least partially) right. A big
> part of the (my) interest for calculators with CAS is simply the
> result of "I like them". ;-)
I like them, I love them... and 10 years dreaming for a pocket size pc
is too much time waiting..
Cheers,
J.Manrique
CdU de la ETSIG
rcobo
(this is not an insult)
i agree ith JYA. you really sound like Marchel.
people assume multiple names and recently i've seen new names i've
never seen before of people that are very knowledgeable in
calculators. i just find it strange. this is only my opinion without
any facts of course. i know that i am probably wrong (100%) but i'll
say it anyway to put some light on it.
regards
GHMoh...@yahoo.com (Helen) wrote in message news:<1a8f5fe5.02042...@posting.google.com>...
Helen
> The 48GX
> with the right cards is more powerful than the palms or laptops simply
> because that is what they were designed to do.
A calculator more powerful than a laptop with, say, Mathematica, or
Matlab, or both? Who do you think you are kidding?
> And as far as your suggestions that an engineer only needs a
> four function calculator is crazy.
I was talking about a scientific calculator, not a four-function one.
And I have probably worked with more engineers in my life than you.
> I am am Electrical Enginnering and
> Physics major and trust me when I say this, if I went into a test
> without my HP 48GX I would probable fail.
I trust you, but that doesn't speak well for you.
> Lets say that test are now
> designed with the calculator in mind.
What school are you going to? Where I teach, students can do just fine
on the exams without an HP 48GX, although they can come in handy. Note
also that I was talking about professionals, not about college kids.
> I am glad that you seem to prefer the palm and that it works for you.
Where did you get that from? I don't even own a Palm.
> You are probably some liberal arts major that only walked by the
> physics and math class because you were not required to have them.
Well, let's just say that you are somewhat off with your guess here. I
am a Physics professor at one of the top universities in the US.
Baboo
new calc project by HP, and the payback doesnt calculate! PDAs, laptops, etc
fill the void.
Cost out the development of a new machine. What would be the unit price of such
an item?
Thats why HP calcs faded away. To keep the margin profitable, they would have
to charge way more for the unit. And how much would you pay? 500 USD? or more?
Economics! Sorry, but thats what it boils down to.
JM
news:639cb51.02042...@posting.google.com...
> hello Hellen,
>
> (this is not an insult)
> i agree ith JYA. you really sound like Marchel.
Maybe you do. I don't.
Jack
JM
news:1a8f5fe5.02042...@posting.google.com...
> That may well be true, but then, there are other considerations there.
> I suspect that an HP49 would be significant overkill for a high-school
> student, and it may also be outside the price range of many students.
But pretty much the same holds for TI89/92 which seem succesfull.
> Plus, at least in the US, TI (for the somewhat higher-end calculators,
> and Casio and a bunch of others for the cheap ones) has a strong lead
> in that market, while HP, traditionally providing high-end calculators
> for professionals, has next to no presence in schools. I realize that
> HP is (or was?) trying hard to move in that market,
Not anymore. You can't win the market with substandard hardware.
HP made mistake of underinvesting it's calculator line. In case of TI
they practically started from nonexisting upper end calculators (in
comparison to HP) to today destroying HP existence on the US market.
> Well, I hope you did understand that I was exaggerating. Of course
> there are more than that, but the fact remains that the fraction is
> minute compared to the one for other calculators.
Upper end HP calculators are practically nonexistent in US retail outside of
online shopping.
> No, I don't think I do. I am trying to make careful observations, and
> to draw as objective a conclusion as I can from them. Yes, I do
> sometimes exaggerate to make a point, but only to provoke thought, not
> to provoke a person. I apologize if I came across that way.
Be carefull. You might get some sarcastic personal insults from Jean Yves
and rcobo.
Jack
Jean-Yves Avenard
"Helen" <GHMoh...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1a8f5fe5.02042...@posting.google.com...
> Well, do you have anything to contribute to this discussion, other
> than a thinly-veiled (and somewhat weak) attempt at an insult?
Well, you mentionned my names in previous post, which I rathr found
offensive. I therefore believe it is my right to say something like this.
You come from nowhere, making comments about everything that of course only
you can know and other people don't. So I just say that you remind me of
somebody... Don't want to sound sexist, but I doubt you're a female as your
name suggests. As a matter of fact, I've never seen any *real* female here
except from time to time for a technical question.
Appart of that, I think the demise of calculators as nothing much to do with
how the calculator market is. The fact is that TI is making a huge profit on
calculators. So there is a market. HP calculators will disappear due to HP's
internal policy mainly. That is making a product and relying on its name: HP
(which used to mean something) in order to sell. Curstomer may get tricked
at the beginning but it doesn't last long.
Calculator market for engineers or scientists is disappearing however, but
maybe because at that stage there is no company providing products anymore.
Only desktop software. So as you have to work with something people switch
to PC.
I don't understand why people always want to explain the situation the other
way around: move to PC -> death of calculator
The other way around works just fine
Jean-Yves
Jean-Yves Avenard
"Helen" <GHMoh...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1a8f5fe5.02042...@posting.google.com...
> n...@imos-consulting.com (Nick Karagiaouroglou) wrote in message
news:<cd9ca36b.02042...@posting.google.com>...
> > There is (was?) already a casiopeia with maple software, which shows
> > that bigger screens, better hard/software are (technically) possible.
>
> I heard that rumour too, but I never saw one of these, neither in real
> life, nor as an advertisement. I suspect it was just a rumour.
That's definitely not rumour. The casiopeia with maple was on sale and
presented during various NCTM (National Council of Teacher in mathematics)
and we used to own one at HP... A typical Windows CE device. A cheap one
with black and white screen.
> Because the screen is too small, and typing is too hard. My feeling is
> that you are banging your head against a fundamental law of nature:
> "CAS do not belong on handheld devices." ;-)
Well, the proof is that the TI89 is gaining more and more market share in
high-school and first year of college/uni. So CAS in handheld devices do
have a reason to exist. Things are constantly evolving.
After all, once believed that you couldn't travel over 100km/h or 640KB of
memory is plenty.
> I am sorry if the above remark gave rise to a misunderstanding: I was
> criticizing neither of the two gentlemen; this was just another stab
> at the lack of documentation, which is HP's (ACO's?) fault alone. I
> notice that HP even removed the CAS reference manuals from their
> website, in other words, were it not for hpcalc (and this newgroup)
> the CAS would be completely undocumented. Trying to sell the
> calculator without such a reference, and not having one available for
> more than a year was a scandal to begin with...
I don't think they purpously removed the manual from their web-site. It's
now managed by an external company, who has no clue about calculators, so
they can't see that something important is missing.
> That could have played a role, too.
The HP49 was just a product to fill a gap (for revenue) while waiting for
Xpander. That's why all resources were put on Xpander, and the HP49 team did
what they could with their tiny resources.
> Not if the screen is too small, see above. As I said, I think there is
> some basic law at work: If you want to do work above a certain
> complexity, then you need a user interface that can accommodate that,
> with sufficient screen real estate and a sufficient number of keys,
> which takes space, unless you can shrink people...
So what do you think about phones with video then ? it's taking off quite
well in Japan. Sure the people over there love gadget, but sooner or later,
they will be everywhere.
cheers
Jean-Yves
Parisse Bernard
> Personally I don't know how much money can a student learn outside
> Spain, but it seems that we are the more poor students in the world..
> Most of you say that students carries laptops.. wow! .. so, only high
> economics level contruies have this.. Just think in all the countries
> around the world, how many of them would like to have a tool like a
> handheld pc with all the capabilities of a CAS for the price of a hp49
> calc???
>
I would like to point that one of my main motivation for making
the HP49 was to bring a cheap CAS affordable to as much students
as possible. The HP49G was in my opinion too expensive (despite
our efforts to convince HP). But then we could make the HP40G which
is of course very perfectible but remains a sub-100$ calc (105 euros
in France) with a CAS. Of course you can not compare it to a soft
for PC, but 100$ is around the price of a *student* licence of Maple
(where you must add the price of the PC and that you can not have
at hand during a lesson). And I don't compare to the price of the
professional licence of Maple or Mathematica...
Unfortunately HP (except for the 40G team) did not really believe
in the chances of the 40 because it is really hard to go
against a monopoly (just imagine a 40G+ with flash rom, latest
ROM revision with spreadsheet included and a 5* faster Saturn),
therefore I'm now coding a PC CAS (that runs also on a linux PDA
in the event someone would sell an affordable PDA with a keyboard)
Bernard Parisse
Jean-Denis
(in message <1a8f5fe5.02042...@posting.google.com>):
>> That's true. Nonetheless I can't get rid of the feeling that it is not
>> the best possible design that always wins. Many factors in play a role
>> for success. The design and implementation of Newton was much better,
>> but Newton flopped.
>
> I never saw one of these, but from what I hear they simply did not
> work as advertised (e.g. handwriting recognition). I think that was a
> case of being too early with a good idea; the processors at that time
> simply could not handle the demands that the Newton OS placed on them.
> The Palms, on the other hand, worked well for all they were meant to
> do from the outset.
>
I own one, and the Newton community is still *very* much alive. What I can
tell you is that the Newton implementation of handwriting recognition does
actually work, with only one caveat: you need to give it one-two week to
adapt to your handwriting. This and the rest of the Newton software is still
unrivalled, by any PDA.
The reasons the Newton failed are commonly recognised to be:
- early Newton models were a bit too slow. The later MessagePad 2100, with a
StrongArm processor running at 160MHz entirelly fixed this though.
- Too expensive. I paid $1100 for my MP2100.
- Form factor: it doesn't fit in a shirt pocket.
That being said, I could not live without my Newton. Time and time again, I
have looked at other PDAs (Palm, Pocket-PC, Psion...), and considered
switching. Everytime, I had to cancel the idea, because my Newton is still
more advanced (e.g. ethernet connectivity, Wifi wireless networking).
A real CAS *would* make sense on a Newton. Too bad it's discontinued.
Jean-Denis
Helen
> Well, you mentionned my names in previous post, which I rathr found
> offensive.
You find it offensive when someone mentions your name? Very
interesting indeed...
> I therefore believe it is my right to say something like this.
It is your right to say whatever you want. You need to consider,
however, that what you say may reflect on you in various ways.
> You come from nowhere,
I apologize for not having frequented this newsgroups for years before
daring to submit a post here.
> making comments about everything that of course only
> you can know and other people don't.
Where did you get that idea? Nothing I said is a secret to anybody.
> So I just say that you remind me of
> somebody... Don't want to sound sexist, but I doubt you're a female as your
> name suggests. As a matter of fact, I've never seen any *real* female here
> except from time to time for a technical question.
You do sound sexist, and very much so.
> Appart of that, I think the demise of calculators as nothing much to do with
> how the calculator market is. The fact is that TI is making a huge profit on
> calculators. So there is a market.
Yes, but not the market HP has been in. TI sells calculators to
schools, and they do that very well. HP sold calculators to Engineers
and other professionals, and to college students. A big part of the
professional market has vanished, as you say below yourself, and the
college market is strongly influenced by the former.
> HP calculators will disappear due to HP's
> internal policy mainly. That is making a product and relying on its name: HP
> (which used to mean something) in order to sell. Curstomer may get tricked
> at the beginning but it doesn't last long.
I don't know how much of a role that plays.
> Calculator market for engineers or scientists is disappearing however, but
> maybe because at that stage there is no company providing products anymore.
> Only desktop software. So as you have to work with something people switch
> to PC.
That is patently false, and reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of
how markets work. If engineers and scientists were screaming for
calculators, there would be a huge market opprtunity for these
devices. Fact is, they don't, and there isn't...
> I don't understand why people always want to explain the situation the other
> way around: move to PC -> death of calculator
Because that is how things work.
> The other way around works just fine
But it has nothing to do with reality.
Love -- Helen.
Rich
Jean-Yves Avenard wrote:
> [...] or 640KB of memory is plenty.
I don't see why everyone finds such great fault with this.
At the time few computers had even 64K, and the 8088 had
an address space of 1MB total. Should they have allocated
more of that 1MB to RAM? Note sure it would have made any
significant difference. For a long time I thought they should
have used the 8086, but it seems that it made little
difference in speed.
640K was plenty for perhaps 10 years. That's quite a long
time in a field that was continuously evolving for the
entire time. And eventually needs did evolve beyond 640K.
But I don't think the original decision was so bad as to
be a sterling example of bad decisions for all time.
Rich
> cheers
> Jean-Yves
Colin Croft
>
> Jean-Yves Avenard wrote:
>
>
>>[...] or 640KB of memory is plenty.
>>
>
> I don't see why everyone finds such great fault with this.
> At the time few computers had even 64K, and the 8088 had
> an address space of 1MB total. Should they have allocated
> more of that 1MB to RAM?
As I understand it (and I may simply be showing my ignorance here) the
problem was not so much the decision to allocate 640K to RAM but more
the decision to locate the BIOS _above_ the 640K. This meant that when
they eventually decided that 640K was not enough (which should surely
have been something that was obviously going to happen) they found that
they had to either start with fresh operating system and discard all the
software which assumed this location or else accept that there would
have to be two locations for RAM - below 640K and above the 1M mark.
Hence, if I remember right, extended memory and all the problems and
difficulty in writing software that went with it. Not least of which
was the problem of having two competing systems of accessing this extra
memory. This I think was the stupid decision, not the size of the memory
allocated.
There are people out there who know more about this than I do - am I on
the right track? :-)
Marchel
> Hello
>
> "Helen" <GHMoh...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1a8f5fe5.02042...@posting.google.com...
> > Well, do you have anything to contribute to this discussion, other
> > than a thinly-veiled (and somewhat weak) attempt at an insult?
>
> Well, you mentionned my names in previous post, which I rathr found
> offensive. I therefore believe it is my right to say something like this.
First of all, if Helen offended you, I don't see a reason why you feel obligated
to insult me
but that is a little detail. Second, you are absolutely right, that instead of
contributing
to the discussion you have "a right" to insult people instead. This right
is especially important and becomes handy, when one has nothing else to say
at the moment.
Mr. Marchel.
Helen
> I'm now coding a PC CAS
Out of curiosity: What do you think is it that your system will be
able to do better than any of the about a dozen or so CAS systems that
are already available for PCs (some of which are free as well)?
Helen
> Well, the proof is that the TI89 is gaining more and more market share in
> high-school and first year of college/uni.
I am a little bit disappointed to see you tout that as a "proof"; you
are quite likely smart enough to see that there could be any number of
reasons for the gain in popularity of the TI89, that have nothing to
do with the CAS.
> So CAS in handheld devices do have a reason to exist.
To a limited extent, yes. It is certainly handy to have something like
electronic integral tables in a pocket device. I suspect that is all
that 99% of the students using the CAS in the TI89 at all even know
about it.
> After all, once believed that you couldn't travel over 100km/h or 640KB of
> memory is plenty.
I don't see how that applies to the subject at hand.
> So what do you think about phones with video then ? it's taking off quite
> well in Japan. Sure the people over there love gadget, but sooner or later,
> they will be everywhere.
Quite possibly, but how is that related to CAS? The complexity of the
task of handling a video phone is near-zero, so my comments do not
apply to that at all.
Parisse Bernard
0/ It is released under the GPL. I know maxima is also released
under the GPL, but the source of maxima is written in Lisp and
there are not much comments in the source that could help someone
improve the system (which has not much changed since 20 years).
1/ it is usable as a C++ library. You are not forced to enter
some interface, learn another language, ... and you can easily
link it to other C libraries (like the Gnu Scientific Library for
example).
Or you can just use it like other CAS inside your prefered interface
(commandline, windows or X-window interface that should look
familiar to TI and HP users or under texmacs for those used to
PC CAS)
2/ it runs on my Linux iPaq
3/ It does geometry.
It's not complete (I'm looking for someone to write an EQW and some
maths functionnalities are incomplete), but
it's promising, at least this is my feeling... And on the PC
I can run it with the same processor speed as other CAS.
More info at
http://www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/~parisse/giac_us.html
Veli-Pekka Nousiainen
How about finally correcting the "changing flags" UI problem
in your 49G CAS ?? You may still co-operate with JYA
and I will try to influence HP to let release the 1.19-7,
which could then be the "final" version, with major bugs ironed out.
with best regards
Veli-Pekka
PS: TO me it sounds simple to save the CAS flags
and restore them later.
Can you make a shell around the CAS start and end procedures?
"Parisse Bernard" <par...@fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr> wrote in message
news:3CCAC16E...@fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr...
> Helen wrote:
X
Parisse Bernard
> Dear Professor Parisse !
>
> How about finally correcting the "changing flags" UI problem
> in your 49G CAS ?? You may still co-operate with JYA
> and I will try to influence HP to let release the 1.19-7,
> which could then be the "final" version, with major bugs ironed out.
>
I do not consider changing flag to be a problem myself, especially since
you can save and restore the flags if you don't like the way the CAS
behaves.
End 2003, when the CAS will be released under the LGPL, you will be able
to change this yourself:-)
Helen
> But pretty much the same holds for TI89/92 which seem succesfull.
Yes, but TI has much more of a presence in those markets already, as
you note below.
> Not anymore. You can't win the market with substandard hardware.
It is very hard to displace an established market leader in any case.
In fact, it is next to impossible, unles your competitor makes severe
mistakes, or you can come up with a product that is significantly more
desirable than anything that your competitor has. Neither is the case
here.
> Upper end HP calculators are practically nonexistent in US retail outside of
> online shopping.
Yes. Office depot used to carry HP49 until a few months ago, but they
have dumped them (I hear they sold HP49s for $20 or so just to get rid
of them).
> Be carefull. You might get some sarcastic personal insults from Jean Yves
> and rcobo.
Don't worry, I'm up to that.
Veli-Pekka Nousiainen
> Veli-Pekka Nousiainen wrote:
> > Dear Professor Parisse !
> >
> > How about finally correcting the "changing flags" UI problem
> > in your 49G CAS ?? You may still co-operate with JYA
> > and I will try to influence HP to let release the 1.19-7,
> > which could then be the "final" version, with major bugs ironed out.
> >
>
> I do not consider changing flag to be a problem myself, especially since
I understand perfectly that YOU do like the behaviour because that's
the way you designed it - for you. But since I'm not the only one to
complain about this there should be a choise to the user.
The save flags should be automatic and in ML and those flags
that might change during CAS processing.
Maybe the Forbit Mode Change should not error
but instead give the behaviour I have described earlier.
> you can save and restore the flags if you don't like the way the CAS
> behaves.
> End 2003, when the CAS will be released under the LGPL, you will be able
> to change this yourself:-)
Change myself? Are you kidding? You - Professor - as the Master Mind
behind the most advanced original Calculator CAS
are much more cabable to do the job. Trivial 4 U, hard 4 me.
with best regards
Veli-Pekka @ NOT(PhD)
Marchel
> It is very hard to displace an established market leader in any case.
> In fact, it is next to impossible, unles your competitor makes severe
> mistakes, or you can come up with a product that is significantly more
> desirable than anything that your competitor has. Neither is the case
> here.
You are right about HP but TI actually managed to do so in the past. When
you consider HP28, HP48S and HP48G line, they were far superior to the
existing TI calulators at the time. TI manged to make TI89/92 line, that was
not that much better than HP48G but was better enough to win the market
with a combination of good hardware, good marketing and sufficient software.
When HP finally got w wake up call they blunder by sticking to already
outdated hardware that could not run efficiently improved software. Note, that
despite opinions on this forum, it is still an open debate if HP49 software is in
fact much better than TI89/92 and very often depends on personal preferences
of the users. I like HP over TI strictly because of RPN, but many hate HP
exactly for that. Its a perfect case of too little too late which I
spoted over a year ago and predicted, that it will just bankrupt HP calculator
operations.
> > Upper end HP calculators are practically nonexistent in US retail outside of
> > online shopping.
>
> Yes. Office depot used to carry HP49 until a few months ago, but they
> have dumped them (I hear they sold HP49s for $20 or so just to get rid
> of them).
HP48 line and earlier HP calculators were carried by every significant retailer in US.
They had even better exposure than TI at the time. It was sudden flow of very good
calculators TI8x and TI92 line which finally made most of retailerd to not even sell
HP49 model. Only home depot did ti but with marginal sales. That is why they
dumped the product.
> > Be carefull. You might get some sarcastic personal insults from Jean Yves
> > and rcobo.
>
> Don't worry, I'm up to that.
Wish you luck.
Jack
Eric Smith
> As I understand it (and I may simply be showing my ignorance here) the
> problem was not so much the decision to allocate 640K to RAM but more
> the decision to locate the BIOS _above_ the 640K.
No, the BIOS was in the last 40K of the 1M space. (Nowdays it's often
the last 128K or more.)
The original PC didn't even officially support 640K. It used DIP switch
settings for the RAM size, instead of autosizing like a modern BIOS. The
largest memory size supported by the DIP switch settings was somewhere
between 500 and 600K, IIRC. To use memory beyond the DIP switch settings,
people used programs run from their autoexec.bat file to tell the BIOS and
DOS to use more memory.
The original CGA and MDA used address space staring at 704K, so that was
considered to be the practical limit on early PCs. Later video cards
took over the space from 640K up, and BIOS autosizing was limited to 640K.
The claim that noone would ever need more than 640K has commonly been
attributed to Bill Gates. But no one has ever found an authoritative
citation, so this is really an urban legend.
Darryl Okahata
> > > There is (was?) already a casiopeia with maple software, which shows
> > > that bigger screens, better hard/software are (technically) possible.
> >
> > I heard that rumour too, but I never saw one of these, neither in real
> > life, nor as an advertisement. I suspect it was just a rumour.
>
> That's definitely not rumour. The casiopeia with maple was on sale and
> presented during various NCTM (National Council of Teacher in mathematics)
> and we used to own one at HP... A typical Windows CE device. A cheap one
> with black and white screen.
Going off on a slight tangent, if you want to see Maxima in action
on a PDA, do this:
[ Note: the following is a bit tedious and ugly. However, it's just
software, and the issues can be resolved. ;-) I'm only mentioning it
now just to give a possible glimpse of the future. ]
* Find someone with a Sharp Zaurus 5000D or 5500 PDA. This is a
recently-released PDA with a 206MHz StrongArm processor & color
display. It runs Linux, and not WinCE. ;-) The color display is
very nice, but the battery life sucks.
[ The following may also work on a Compaq Ipaq that's been modified to
run Linux, but I haven't tried it. ]
* If they haven't already done it, have them install the "terminal"
application (on the CDROM that comes with the Zaurus).
* Go ye here and download the maxima package for the Zaurus (it's at the
very bottom of the page):
http://web.njit.edu/~rxt1077/clisp-maxima-zaurus.html
For convenience, here's a direct download link:
http://web.njit.edu/~rxt1077/clisp-maxima-zaurus.tar.bz2
* Under Unix or cygwin (Windows), extract the files:
bunzip2 < clisp-maxima-zaurus.tar.bz2 | tar xvf -
This will produce two files:
lisp.run
maxima-clisp.mem
* Transfer the files to the Zaurus, and put them both into some
convenient directory. Go to the directory in the terminal window.
* From the terminal window, run:
set +m
stty susp '^-'
./lisp.run -M maxima-clisp.mem
The "set +m" is important, as it works around a bash issue when the
Zaurus is suspended and resumed.
This will start up maxima in the terminal window. Unfortunately,
maxima is configured, by default, to work with an 80-column screen,
and the the terminal window is only 44 columns wide. To fix this, run
(at the maxima prompt):
linel: 43
(Yes, it's "43" and not "44". You've got to use a value one less than
the screen width. Unfortunately, you've got to do this each time you
start maxima. I haven't found out a way to make this automatic.
AFAICT, there is none.)
* At this point, you can try out maxima commands (don't forget the
trailing semicolon in the following!):
Indefinite integrals:
integrate(x/(1+x^3),x);
Definite integrals:
integrate(x/(1+x^2),x,0,1);
Limits:
limit((2*x+1)/(3*x+2),x,inf);
limit(sin(3*x)/x,x,0);
Equation solving:
solve([x+y+z=5,3*x-5*y=10,y+2*z=3],[x,y,z]);
* For an introduction to maxima, see:
http://members.tripod.com/~Probability/intromax.htm
(Note that this intro talks about "macsyma" and not "maxima". Maxima
was derived from Macsyma, and so the tutorial is still good. However,
one Zaurus difference is that Ctrl-Z doesn't work -- don't even try to
hit it.)
The main web site for maxima is:
http://maxima.sourceforge.net/
And online documentation can be found as:
http://maxima.sourceforge.net/referencemanual/maxima_toc.html
(Note that the chapter on Symmetries is in French. ;-)
* To quit, enter:
quit();
Note that maxima isn't perfect. Although it's derived from the old DOE
Macsyma, some bugs have crept into it, which people are working on
fixing.
--
Darryl Okahata
dar...@soco.agilent.com
DISCLAIMER: this message is the author's personal opinion and does not
constitute the support, opinion, or policy of Agilent Technologies, or
of the little green men that have been following him all day.
Darryl Okahata
> 2/ it runs on my Linux iPaq
While your work looks great, I'd like to point out that maxima
also works on a a PDA (the new Sharp Zaurus). I suspect the Zaurus
binaries will also run "as-is" on the iPaq.
If anyone's interested, see my other posting in this thread.
Helen
> you consider HP28, HP48S and HP48G line, they were far superior to the
> existing TI calulators at the time. TI manged to make TI89/92 line, that was
> not that much better than HP48G but was better enough to win the market
> with a combination of good hardware, good marketing and sufficient software.
It is somewhat hard to argue this without any hard data, but I doubt
that TI ever won the market that HP was in. I don't see many engineers
and scientists use TI89s either.
> When HP finally got w wake up call they blunder by sticking to already
> outdated hardware that could not run efficiently improved software.
Yes, that was unfortunate, or rather the effect of HP not being
committed to developing new calculator hardware anymore; which might
have been caused by their (correct) perception that there was no
market _for them_ in that area anymore.
> Note, that despite opinions on this forum, it is still an open debate
> if HP49 software is in fact much better than TI89/92 and very often
> depends on personal preferences of the users.
Yes, I think that is debateable. Particularly so if you restrict the
debate to the (small) subset of CAS features that most people will
realistically be interested in using.
> I like HP over TI strictly because of RPN,
Same here... Also, the keyboard layout of the TI89 is a disaster,
plain and simple; one gets the impression that the various functions
were strewn over the keyboard at random.
> Its a perfect case of too little too late which I spoted over a year ago
> and predicted, that it will just bankrupt HP calculator operations.
I don't know if much of the situation really is HP's fault, and if it
is, then it definitely is not a recent fault. You would then have to
argue that HP should have seen the need of a substantial presence in
the educational market decades ago. You are right, it was a case of
too late, but much too late, not just a few years too late.
Helen
> Xpander. That's why all resources were put on Xpander, and the HP49 team did
> what they could with their tiny resources.
By the way, if that is what was going on, then I am not surprised they
closed down ACO. First of all, it is enlightening to see you openly
admit that the HP 49 was just some sort of a scam, trying to milk some
money out of a cheap knock-off of a successful product (the HP 48).
Thank you very much for this information, confirming what many of us
had suspected all along.
Second, so you were putting all your resources into something as
ill-conceived as the Xpander? That stillborn child that never even
made it out the door (and for good reasons I might add)? Who the hell
do you think would have wanted to buy this thing, and at what price,
other than for a curiosity cabinet?
One thing is entirely clear to me: There seemed to have been no
marketing competence at all at ACO. There were people with a good
understanding of computer algebra and calculator design and related
issues, but precious few seem to have understood that a commercial
product, once it has been designed, ultimately must be sold, and sold
in sufficient numbers at that. Thus they designed products (like the
HP 49G and, even worse, this silly contraption named the Xpander) that
were completely out of touch with reality, i.e. any existing markets.
And you people were surprised that HP closed you down???
Nick Karagiaouroglou
> > system like "write your stuff on the screen", wouldn't that be a
> > CAS-calculator with another name? I think the usage defines the
> > machine, not its name.
> X
> We already almost had it: XP'nder
> (using a more modern approach in naming conventions)
> And that was design by the ACO Team...
> VPN
Oh yes, this *almost* again! Is there any other company that could
make such a device? Or anything close?
Greetings,
Nick.
Nick Karagiaouroglou
> n...@imos-consulting.com (Nick Karagiaouroglou) wrote in message news:<cd9ca36b.02042...@posting.google.com>...
> > that bigger screens, better hard/software are (technically) possible.
>
> I heard that rumour too, but I never saw one of these, neither in real
> life, nor as an advertisement. I suspect it was just a rumour.
>
> > your pocket?
>
> Because the screen is too small, and typing is too hard. My feeling is
> that you are banging your head against a fundamental law of nature:
> "CAS do not belong on handheld devices." ;-)
The screen of the HP49G is indeed often too small. But remember that
people before a couple of years named it big. As the time passes by
always bigger screens for computers come out, which let the older ones
appear smaller. The first question is: Is it big enough for the work
that must be done? If the answer is "yes" then it can stay that way.
If the answer is "no", then the second question arises? Are ther any
available technologies for making it bigger? I think that there are.
The screen of the HP95LX was much bigger and also with a better
resolution, and that was already in the eighties. Of course the screen
(as we know it) of "pocket" calculators can't be as big as a computer
monitor, as long as the shell of the calculator das so small physical
dimensions. But there are many other ways to construct calculators,
like for example with shells that fold, and the like. Another possible
way would be to have a flexible screen that you can connect to the
calc, and disconnect/fold it when you don#t need it any more.
> > Oh, come on now. Captain Avenard, Prof. Parisse and the rest of the
> > crue know only just a few of the people here, but when they can help,
> > then they always do. Even if some "Nicks" around here are fuming from
> > time to time because of some "unexpected behavior". ;-)
>
> I am sorry if the above remark gave rise to a misunderstanding: I was
> criticizing neither of the two gentlemen; this was just another stab
> at the lack of documentation, which is HP's (ACO's?) fault alone. I
> notice that HP even removed the CAS reference manuals from their
> website, in other words, were it not for hpcalc (and this newgroup)
> the CAS would be completely undocumented. Trying to sell the
> calculator without such a reference, and not having one available for
> more than a year was a scandal to begin with...
Amen! Regarding the huge amount of available commands, some of which
sound or work similarly, it is a real huge question, why so little
attention has been given to decent documentation. If I remember well,
one of the first (and also remaing) complaints about the HP49G was
(and still is) "how does the darn thing work?"
> > I guess you mean that you carry your laptop with mathematica, or
> > similar software. Well yes, there are much more powerful instruments
> > than the calculators of today, let them be with or without CAS. But
> > imagine a very very small weight package with good hardware and
> > mathematica (or any other "bigger" package.) Imagine it easily
> > programmable, flexible and with long battery life. Wouldn't that be a
> > good thing?
>
> Not if the screen is too small, see above. As I said, I think there is
> some basic law at work: If you want to do work above a certain
> complexity, then you need a user interface that can accommodate that,
> with sufficient screen real estate and a sufficient number of keys,
> which takes space, unless you can shrink people...
Yes but starting from a certain degree of enshrinkment you'll get
problems with resolution ;-)
Sufficient number of keys? Well for math work, I would prefer no keys
at all, but rather the possibility to write my stuff directly on the
screen. Best user interface would be a living paper sheet with math
knowledge for me.
> > That's true. Nonetheless I can't get rid of the feeling that it is not
> > the best possible design that always wins. Many factors in play a role
> > for success. The design and implementation of Newton was much better,
> > but Newton flopped.
>
> I never saw one of these, but from what I hear they simply did not
> work as advertised (e.g. handwriting recognition). I think that was a
> case of being too early with a good idea; the processors at that time
> simply could not handle the demands that the Newton OS placed on them.
> The Palms, on the other hand, worked well for all they were meant to
> do from the outset.
Oh yes, it did work and how it did work! Much better than anything
that has been brought to the market until today. Comparing a Pilot to
the Newton is much like comparing a cro-magnon to a homo sapiens.
Especially the last update of the software was a huge step ahead. But
so it goes. Apple does something today, everybody is yelling that it
is not good, and after some years they present us the "novities" which
we knew and forgot about.
> > P.S. I must also admit that you are (at least partially) right. A big
> > part of the (my) interest for calculators with CAS is simply the
> > result of "I like them". ;-)
>
> Actually, I like them too. But the fact that you and I and a couple of
> others like them is not sufficient to make the product successful,
> unfortunately.
Wish I could say something against this last sentence, but I can't.
Though I am a zero in economics (can't even manage my own economy
;-)), I think that it is true that markets are not made of a few
hundreds of people. (Or even a few thousands.) But according to
nowadays marketing books, which I tried to read and understand (with
little success) , the first imperative should be "*Create* demand".
Doesn't that mean that the company XYZ which is manufacturing the
calculator ABC (or steen-o-cobo GX ;-)) should try first to convince
Helen and Nick that they can't live without it? Or did I completely
misunderstood that? :-/
Greetings,
Nick.
Nick Karagiaouroglou
"Jean-Yves Avenard" <jean...@NOSPAMavenard.org> wrote in message news:<k7sy8.50038$uR5.1...@newsfeeds.bigpond.com>...
> Hello
>
> "Helen" <GHMoh...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1a8f5fe5.02042...@posting.google.com...
> > n...@imos-consulting.com (Nick Karagiaouroglou) wrote in message
> news:<cd9ca36b.02042...@posting.google.com>...
> > > There is (was?) already a casiopeia with maple software, which shows
> > > that bigger screens, better hard/software are (technically) possible.
> >
> > I heard that rumour too, but I never saw one of these, neither in real
> > life, nor as an advertisement. I suspect it was just a rumour.
>
> That's definitely not rumour. The casiopeia with maple was on sale and
> presented during various NCTM (National Council of Teacher in mathematics)
> and we used to own one at HP... A typical Windows CE device. A cheap one
> with black and white screen.
*Was* on sale? You mean was but is no more?
Do you remember wher ou used to keep them when you were at HP? ;-)
> > Because the screen is too small, and typing is too hard. My feeling is
> > that you are banging your head against a fundamental law of nature:
> > "CAS do not belong on handheld devices." ;-)
>
> Well, the proof is that the TI89 is gaining more and more market share in
> high-school and first year of college/uni. So CAS in handheld devices do
> have a reason to exist. Things are constantly evolving.
> After all, once believed that you couldn't travel over 100km/h or 640KB of
> memory is plenty.
And that Maple on a handheld isn't possible/useful. ;-)
> > I am sorry if the above remark gave rise to a misunderstanding: I was
> > criticizing neither of the two gentlemen; this was just another stab
> > at the lack of documentation, which is HP's (ACO's?) fault alone. I
> > notice that HP even removed the CAS reference manuals from their
> > website, in other words, were it not for hpcalc (and this newgroup)
> > the CAS would be completely undocumented. Trying to sell the
> > calculator without such a reference, and not having one available for
> > more than a year was a scandal to begin with...
>
> I don't think they purpously removed the manual from their web-site. It's
> now managed by an external company, who has no clue about calculators, so
> they can't see that something important is missing.
Oh, instead of "the rats abandon the ship" HP made it "We kick the
rats away"?
;-)
> > That could have played a role, too.
>
> The HP49 was just a product to fill a gap (for revenue) while waiting for
> Xpander. That's why all resources were put on Xpander, and the HP49 team did
> what they could with their tiny resources.
Yes captain! It is a little (big?) wonder that the 49G is as good as
it is, with all its strengths and flows. If HP had gave the ACO
adequate resources, then the HP49G would be unbelievable (which it
sometimes already is...). But then HP kicked the ACO out and that was
it. I can't get rid of the feeling that this was a minutiously planed
and carried out death operation right from the start.
> > Not if the screen is too small, see above. As I said, I think there is
> > some basic law at work: If you want to do work above a certain
> > complexity, then you need a user interface that can accommodate that,
> > with sufficient screen real estate and a sufficient number of keys,
> > which takes space, unless you can shrink people...
>
> So what do you think about phones with video then ? it's taking off quite
> well in Japan. Sure the people over there love gadget, but sooner or later,
> they will be everywhere.
Exactly! It looks like technology sells not only because of necessity
nowadays, but also because of, well,... "I wanna have it"-reasons. Or
else, why did Tamagochi sell that good? And if it did sell good, then
why not calcs with a fantastic CAS?
Greetings,
Nick.
P.S. Steen, think about the possiblity of having a greek guy that
convinces people to buy *the* calc. (After a couple of ouzo everybody
is convinced ;-))
Nick Karagiaouroglou
> > Well, the proof is that the TI89 is gaining more and more market share in
> > high-school and first year of college/uni.
>
> I am a little bit disappointed to see you tout that as a "proof"; you
> are quite likely smart enough to see that there could be any number of
> reasons for the gain in popularity of the TI89, that have nothing to
> do with the CAS.
>
> > So CAS in handheld devices do have a reason to exist.
>
> To a limited extent, yes. It is certainly handy to have something like
> electronic integral tables in a pocket device. I suspect that is all
> that 99% of the students using the CAS in the TI89 at all even know
> about it.
What a pity! So much wonderful things, unknown to most students. Is it
really that way?
> Quite possibly, but how is that related to CAS? The complexity of the
> task of handling a video phone is near-zero, so my comments do not
> apply to that at all.
Well, compared to a CAS a video phone is "plug and play". But a new
kind of inteface could improve the situation. (Of course provided
that mathematical education doesn't fail.)
Greetings,
Nick.
Nick Karagiaouroglou
Jean-Denis <jdmvbu...@mailbutnospam.com> wrote in message news:<01HW.B8F067D40...@news.noos.fr>...
> On Fri, 26 Apr 2002 17:16:54 +0200, Helen wrote
> (in message <1a8f5fe5.02042...@posting.google.com>):
>
> >> That's true. Nonetheless I can't get rid of the feeling that it is not
> >> the best possible design that always wins. Many factors in play a role
> >> for success. The design and implementation of Newton was much better,
> >> but Newton flopped.
> >
> > I never saw one of these, but from what I hear they simply did not
> > work as advertised (e.g. handwriting recognition). I think that was a
> > case of being too early with a good idea; the processors at that time
> > simply could not handle the demands that the Newton OS placed on them.
> > The Palms, on the other hand, worked well for all they were meant to
> > do from the outset.
> >
>
> I own one, and the Newton community is still *very* much alive. What I can
> tell you is that the Newton implementation of handwriting recognition does
> actually work, with only one caveat: you need to give it one-two week to
> adapt to your handwriting. This and the rest of the Newton software is still
> unrivalled, by any PDA.
And if we think really consequently, this way (adaptation time) is the
best possible. The system evolves with time, and fits better and
better to your handwriting. This is a *real* individual solution and a
very intelligent one.
> The reasons the Newton failed are commonly recognised to be:
>
> - early Newton models were a bit too slow. The later MessagePad 2100, with a
> StrongArm processor running at 160MHz entirelly fixed this though.
>
> - Too expensive. I paid $1100 for my MP2100.
Quality has its price. A Mercedes is more expensive than a an Opel,
but close their doors and the sound alone will tell you which one was
the door of a Mercedes.
> - Form factor: it doesn't fit in a shirt pocket.
Well, neither does the HP49G.
> That being said, I could not live without my Newton. Time and time again, I
> have looked at other PDAs (Palm, Pocket-PC, Psion...), and considered
> switching. Everytime, I had to cancel the idea, because my Newton is still
> more advanced (e.g. ethernet connectivity, Wifi wireless networking).
Yes, Jean-Denis, tell them the difference ;-)
> A real CAS *would* make sense on a Newton. Too bad it's discontinued.
Yes, *that* would have been great. Imagine a Mathematica-like
software, that accepts your *written* input instead of 100s of key
presses for a single matrix.
Greetings,
Nick.
Nick Karagiaouroglou
> > There is (was?) already a casiopeia with maple software, which shows
> > that bigger screens, better hard/software are (technically) possible.
>
Drat! Drat! and triple drat! (with rolling mediterranean "rrrrr")
> > Why not having such a professional instrument, like mathematica, in
> > your pocket?
> >
>
> Yes, why not.. And from many "hours" spend in internet surfing I found
> a tool that could fit your expectatives:
> http://www.intrinsyc.com/products/referencedesigns/cerfpda.asp
>
-snipped tech specs--
> And it is as "cheap" as a laptop with Mathematica (perhaps a little
> more).. Oh, I should say as a laptop with legal Mathematica..
>
> Personally I don't know how much money can a student learn outside
> Spain, but it seems that we are the more poor students in the world..
> Most of you say that students carries laptops.. wow! .. so, only high
> economics level contruies have this.. Just think in all the countries
> around the world, how many of them would like to have a tool like a
> handheld pc with all the capabilities of a CAS for the price of a hp49
> calc???
Say that again!
But one thing I don't understand. Can I use the "cerf" for mathematics
right out of the box? Or would I have to develop first?
> > > Being able to do these things on a "pocket"
> > > calculator may be cute, but it is of next to no practical value. And
> > > that is not only because you have to be a personal friend of Avenar,
> > > Parisse, et alia in order to be considered worthy of knowing what it
> > > actually is that this HP49G CAS can do ...
> >
>
> Perhaps no practical value, but an hp49 is cheaper than a PC, now
> think that handhelds can be done for the same price, this would be
> third world door to computer world.. Probably most countries third
> world countries can't earn money to buy a PC for every student at
> class, but a cheap linux handheld could do more for them that a PC..
Again, amen!
> And speaking about "first world".. At my University we have several
> classrooms for math with computer teaching, but there isn't enough
> space for everybody.. so teachers can't spent enough time at them..
> imagine how much can be done with a handheld at class with the right
> software...
>
> > > > I don't get that. There must be engineers around, a lot of them.
> > >
> > > But they do not need nor use programmable calculators anymore. There
> > > used to be a time when an HP 41 was the standard equipment that any
> > > engineer in a design or analysis department was given on his/her first
> > > day. Although, at least in larger companies, there was also some more
> > > powerful computing machinery available, engineers used these things
> > > day in and day out. Now, they all can carry a 2GHz CPU with 1GB of
> > > memory and a 60GB hard drive in their briefcase (and I am only
>
> At what price? How many engineers around the world could afford for a
> machine like that?? And students?
>
> And you are talking about professional life.. so here it is the
> funniest of all this. As a student we should learn all, but the tools
> are for professionals, but the students don't know the tools untill
> the leave university because they don't have money for them, ok the
> university should provide them.. How much money should the university
> spent?.. funny.
Yes, and when you want to go for a job, everybody asks you about
experience with tools you never had the opportunity to work with. With
a small afordable package, something like a math specialized tool, you
could at least experience working with a CAS, be it different from the
"standard" tools.
> > imagine a very very small weight package with good hardware and
> > mathematica (or any other "bigger" package.) Imagine it easily
> > programmable, flexible and with long battery life. Wouldn't that be a
> > good thing?
> >
>
> Good? This would be marvellous...
So perhaps some of the companies out there, have mercy and stop
thinking that we want a non math companion. Mathematizing you can do
anything, even management, but show me a palm that would solve a deq
;-)
Greetings,
Nick.
Jordi Hidalgo
> [...] the HP 49 was just some sort of a scam, trying to milk some
> money out of a cheap knock-off of a successful product (the HP 48).
And later:
> One thing is entirely clear to me: There seemed to have been no [...]
> competence at all at ACO. [...] And you people were surprised that HP
> closed you down???
Oh Helen, where have you been all my life?
> You are right, it was a case of too late, but much too late,
> not just a few years too late.
"I'll go burn some sack; 'tis too late to go to bed now." ;-)
Shakespeare. Twelfth Night. Act II, Scene III.
Warm regards,
Bye.
Jordi Hidalgo
HPCC member #1046
jo...@tv3mail.com
-
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Marchel
> It is somewhat hard to argue this without any hard data, but I doubt
> that TI ever won the market that HP was in. I don't see many engineers
> and scientists use TI89s either.
Oh, but you will :-)
All young students in US will eventually become engineers of tommorow.
They don't have much choice beyond TI, they are tought in high schools
and most universities on TI, many corporations have basic TI training for it's
lower level technical personel but I've yet to see one designed for HP or
Casio. In that sense TI won (or Casio :-( ).
> > When HP finally got w wake up call they blunder by sticking to already
> > outdated hardware that could not run efficiently improved software.
>
> Yes, that was unfortunate, or rather the effect of HP not being
> committed to developing new calculator hardware anymore; which might
> have been caused by their (correct) perception that there was no
> market _for them_ in that area anymore.
> > Note, that despite opinions on this forum, it is still an open debate
> > if HP49 software is in fact much better than TI89/92 and very often
> > depends on personal preferences of the users.
>
> Yes, I think that is debateable. Particularly so if you restrict the
> debate to the (small) subset of CAS features that most people will
> realistically be interested in using.
Precisely. I love TI automatic fast simplification of formulas, where many
consider that as fault.
> > I like HP over TI strictly because of RPN,
>
> Same here... Also, the keyboard layout of the TI89 is a disaster,
> plain and simple; one gets the impression that the various functions
> were strewn over the keyboard at random.
In my case I have TI92. It's bulky, but it's keyobard happen to be superior,
thanks of course to QWERTY. I also hate TI Basic. It's not only
slow but seems like afterthought added to the system a the last hour.
> > Its a perfect case of too little too late which I spoted over a year ago
> > and predicted, that it will just bankrupt HP calculator operations.
>
> I don't know if much of the situation really is HP's fault, and if it
> is, then it definitely is not a recent fault. You would then have to
> argue that HP should have seen the need of a substantial presence in
> the educational market decades ago. You are right, it was a case of
> too late, but much too late, not just a few years too late.
Too litlle too late rarely is the outcome of some recent bad decisions.
Rather it is the product of years of neglecting the customer needs and
ignoring the competition.
Jack
Helen
> really that way?
Yes, but so what? There are many wonderful things out there that lots
of people know nothing about, in all areas of human interest. Why
should everybody be interested in computer algebra?
> Well, compared to a CAS a video phone is "plug and play". But a new
> kind of inteface could improve the situation.
No, it could not. The complexity of the interaction you need to do CA
is simply orders of magnitude above the one you need to handle a video
phone. That is so obvious that it should not require any further
explanation. No interface of any kind can remove that kind of
complexity, period.
Unless, of course, you have a device that is so intelligent that it
can do all the work for you. For now, and in the foreseeable future,
those "devices" are called "mathematicians", "scientists", etc. ;-)
Jean-Yves Avenard
"Helen" <GHMoh...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1a8f5fe5.02042...@posting.google.com...
> Second, so you were putting all your resources into something as
> ill-conceived as the Xpander? That stillborn child that never even
> made it out the door (and for good reasons I might add)? Who the hell
> do you think would have wanted to buy this thing, and at what price,
> other than for a curiosity cabinet?
You obviously do not know the inside story, or you know way more that you
would like us to believe.
The fact that the Xpander project was cancelled had little to do with the
product itself, rather the consequences of HP getting out of the education
business (which not surprisingly happened just after a change of president)
I do not believe that Xpander was an ill-conceived project. Maybe some
choices like using Windows CE raised its price over than what it should have
been if you are targeting students.
Xpander was the really first product designed by teachers for teachers.
Hundred of them were involved in the process. Of course this machine had
absolutely nothing to do in the calculator business. And it was not a
calculator as such, but I believe it was a great concept. The only good
thing about not releasing such appliance is that the existing HP community
can't complain about this product not being a traditional HP calculator :)
I am still in contact with various teachers all over the world, and they are
all waiting for a product similar to what Xpander could have been. And so
far there is nothing close to it.
Xpander was a pure learning tool aim at high-school student.
> One thing is entirely clear to me: There seemed to have been no
> marketing competence at all at ACO. There were people with a good
But did HP ever have a good marketing team ?
Many people here complain that HP is not what it used to be, that is a
company with products designed by engineers for engineers.
Look at the first Windows CE devices. That was a pure marketing product. But
totally useless with unusable feature. Obviously the people who first
designed it didn't really use it on a day to day basis.
> understanding of computer algebra and calculator design and related
> issues, but precious few seem to have understood that a commercial
> product, once it has been designed, ultimately must be sold, and sold
> in sufficient numbers at that. Thus they designed products (like the
The HP49G was made in response to the HP calculator community who have been
asking for a long time for an HP48 with more memory, faster and with more
CAS capabilities. That's exactly what the HP49 was.
But then you had marketing people who came over and said: it has to look
more like a TI, let's change the design so it looks more : "cool". Then it
had to look even more like a TI with algebraic in it.
If the product had been designed by engineers only, it would have looked
much closer to an existing HP48 hardware...
> HP 49G and, even worse, this silly contraption named the Xpander) that
> were completely out of touch with reality, i.e. any existing markets.
So you claim that Xpander had no market whatsoever? On which ground.. I
would be interested to know how so many teachers could be wrong.
> And you people were surprised that HP closed you down???
Not more surprised when I see how HP is doing when shutting down division or
reducing all the R&D budgets.
I was really happy when ACO was closed down, I would have left anyway and as
a plus I got a nice package with it. Thank you Carly
Jean-Yves
Nick Karagiaouroglou
> > What a pity! So much wonderful things, unknown to most students. Is it
> > really that way?
>
> Yes, but so what? There are many wonderful things out there that lots
> of people know nothing about, in all areas of human interest. Why
> should everybody be interested in computer algebra?
Of course not computer algebra itself but computer algebra as the tool
for doing mathematics. As one door for entering the math universe.
*That* is the pity. That we have tools for making an easy entrance to
a very fascinating world, which could activate some more grey cells,
but instead of this we expect a black box to solve some integrals.
Now, of course you could ask me also, why should everybody be
interested in mathematics? Well, working the mathematical way, we can
learn to draw maximum of conclusions from a minimum of premises.
Exercising this helps abstracting from special to general, and helps
sharpening mind. Perhaps the answer to the question about interest for
mathematics could be a new question: Do we want it the easy way, that
is to believe anything without thinking for ourselves, or do we want
to wonder, think and ask about the world, life and anything else ;-)
> > Well, compared to a CAS a video phone is "plug and play". But a new
> > kind of inteface could improve the situation.
>
> No, it could not. The complexity of the interaction you need to do CA
> is simply orders of magnitude above the one you need to handle a video
> phone. That is so obvious that it should not require any further
> explanation. No interface of any kind can remove that kind of
> complexity, period.
If this interaction is by means of menus, dialogs, command lines and
other primitive user interfaces, then yes, you are right. But as
already said, a good recognition software, that can receive and
understand your writings on a touch screen could be the first step.
Instead of typing your input in the input lines of mathematica, you
could also write it on the screen, this doesn't change anything of the
inner workings of the CAS.
> Unless, of course, you have a device that is so intelligent that it
> can do all the work for you. For now, and in the foreseeable future,
> those "devices" are called "mathematicians", "scientists", etc. ;-)
Ahhh, so may I say: "I need new batteries, can you hear me?" ;-)
Greetings,
Nick.
Helen
> Of course not computer algebra itself but computer algebra as the tool
> for doing mathematics. As one door for entering the math universe.
That is a very important point, and one you are getting completely
wrong, IMO. CA is not a tool for entering the universe of mathematics,
anymore than, say, computer-controlled offset printing machines are
the tools for entering the universe of literature. In order to use CAS
profitably, you already have to know a lot of mathematics.
> *That* is the pity. That we have tools for making an easy entrance to
> a very fascinating world, which could activate some more grey cells,
> but instead of this we expect a black box to solve some integrals.
There is no "easy entrance" into the world of mathematics. Quite
likely you have learnt so much mathematics in your life that you have
all but forgotten this fundamental truth. Are you seriously suggesting
that anybody would be able to use a CAS, without a deep knowledge of
the mathematics involved? And then even learn something in the
process? Have you ever taught mathematics at any level?
Maybe I am old-fashioned, but my experience with my own children tells
me that you cannot teach them to run before they can walk. As an
example, IMO it would be disastrous to give calculators to
six-year-olds in order to provide them with an "easy entrance" into
some of the basic mathematical concepts relating to whole numbers
(counting, adding, subtracting, etc.). I believe the same is true, at
a different level, for high-school math, college math, etc.
> Instead of typing your input in the input lines of mathematica, you
> could also write it on the screen, this doesn't change anything of the
> inner workings of the CAS.
But it also does not change the fact that what you write on that
screen can potentially be very complex, and the (intermediate) output
usually is even more complex. What you describe above does not change
any of this at all.
Parisse Bernard
> n...@imos-consulting.com (Nick Karagiaouroglou) wrote in message news:<cd9ca36b.0204...@posting.google.com>...
>
>>Of course not computer algebra itself but computer algebra as the tool
>>for doing mathematics. As one door for entering the math universe.
>>
>
> That is a very important point, and one you are getting completely
> wrong, IMO. CA is not a tool for entering the universe of mathematics,
> anymore than, say, computer-controlled offset printing machines are
> the tools for entering the universe of literature. In order to use CAS
> profitably, you already have to know a lot of mathematics.
>
I do not agree with you. CAS can help students learn maths.
Of course you will not learn maths with CAS (or other software) only.
But there are different categories of students:
- some students are sufficiently talented and do not need extra
tools to be able to make their intuition on new maths concepts.
Using CAS ot not does not change their abilities to understand maths.
- some other students are not able to do this as easily. They
need to see many examples before mastering the new concept.
Unfortunately most of these students are not comfortable with
calculus and can therefore not study these examples without
extra help (a soft or a teacher).
In the "old-fashion" teaching way, you satisfy only the 1st
category and tell to the 2nd that they are unable to learn
maths (this is called in French elitisme, I don't know the
English word). If you accept CAS and other soft, you give a chance
to the 2nd category. Of course accepting CAS does not mean you
only tell the student "you can use soft xxx if you want", it means
you learn them using a CAS and you illustrate the concepts you
are teaching using the CAS (which BTW permits to make non-academic
examples. I'm always disturbed by the fact that most students
have a wrong picture of many maths aspects because all the
exercices we give are made to be solved by hand. For example
most students do not know that a generic function does not
have an antiderivative expressed in terms of simple functions,
or learn about factorization of polynomials up to Galois theory
but have no idea how you can find an approximate root of
a polynomial...)
Helen
> You obviously do not know the inside story,
That is of course true.
> The fact that the Xpander project was cancelled had little to do with the
> product itself, rather the consequences of HP getting out of the education
> business (which not surprisingly happened just after a change of president)
Quite likely it had to do with the fact that it was designed for a
market that HP apparently could not gain entrance to, to any
meaningful extent anyway.
> Xpander was the really first product designed by teachers for teachers.
> Hundred of them were involved in the process.
I don't know what kind of teachers were involved, but speaking for
myself (teaching at a higher level than what the Xpander might have
been targeted at, mind you) I simply cannot see a useful place for
this device. I would ask the question: What benefit does it give the
student that s/he cannot obtain otherwise? Is that benefit worth the
price?
> Xpander was a pure learning tool aim at high-school student.
I don't think there is any need for that kind of a tool. As an
example, when my children (in kindergarten and first few grades)
learned basic concepts of math, we tried all sorts of PC software to
help them in this process. The result was that they learned the most
from old-fashioned books (well, actually they were not old-fashioned,
but, as books, they were old-fashioned devices compared to computers).
Only after they had a very good grasp of the basics could they benefit
from the software, and at that point it becomes questionable whether
the software did anything for them that they could not have obtained
quite as well otherwise.
> But did HP ever have a good marketing team ?
Well, I would say that it appears unlikely that the undeniable
successes that HP has had through the times, with various products,
have been purely accidental.
> The HP49G was made in response to the HP calculator community
That was one of the fundamental mistakes: The calculator was designed
based on requests from a very non-representative group of HP 48
addicts, rather than based on what potential future customers might
have been interested in.
You end up with a calculator that everybody that already has an HP 48
will buy, but nobody else.
You end up with a calculator that is sold without a manual, since the
few people who are interested in the device can simply use their old
HP 48 manuals.
You end up with a product that fails in the market place.
Congratulations.
> That's exactly what the HP49 was.
Well, yes (sort of, the speed improvement is of course debateable, and
mostly cosmetic, and the calculator also came with a few things that
people had not asked for, like a lousy keyboard), and nobody outside
of the above group wanted it. Not surprisingly, I might add.
> But then you had marketing people who came over and said: it has to look
> more like a TI, let's change the design so it looks more : "cool". Then it
> had to look even more like a TI with algebraic in it.
That line of thinking did make a certain amount of sense. You need to
build a device for your customers. Trying to tell your customers that
they are stupid if they don't like the way your product works is not
usually a good strategy...
Most people have never used RPN and are initially put off by it, so
you have to accommodate them. Afterwards, they may learn by themselves
that RPN is a good idea.
> If the product had been designed by engineers only, it would have looked
> much closer to an existing HP48 hardware...
Which probably would have reduced its sales even more.
> So you claim that Xpander had no market whatsoever? On which ground..
See above.
Helen
> But there are different categories of students:
> - some students are sufficiently talented and do not need extra
> tools to be able to make their intuition on new maths concepts.
> Using CAS ot not does not change their abilities to understand maths.
Yes, so far I'm with you.
> In the "old-fashion" teaching way, you satisfy only the 1st
> category and tell to the 2nd that they are unable to learn
> maths (this is called in French elitisme, I don't know the
> English word).
What do you know, it's "elitism" in English, ;-)
I don't know how you teach in France, but you are not seriously
telling me that your description above is what happens in French
schools, are you? I would expect that in France, like in any other
country in the world, the teacher would make an effort to explain the
concepts in question, so that even the less gifted students can
understand.
> If you accept CAS and other soft, you give a chance
> to the 2nd category.
Are you really suggesting that the CAS can replace the teacher you
described above? I think this is entirely unrealistic. No CAS I know
can do that. No CAS I know can explain the concepts to a student.
> Of course accepting CAS does not mean you
> only tell the student "you can use soft xxx if you want", it means
> you learn them using a CAS and you illustrate the concepts you
> are teaching using the CAS
O.k., but here is where I disagree: You can do the same illustrations
without a CAS, and I don't believe that these illustrations gain in
any significant way through the use of CAS.
>(which BTW permits to make non-academic
> examples. I'm always disturbed by the fact that most students
> have a wrong picture of many maths aspects because all the
> exercices we give are made to be solved by hand. For example
> most students do not know that a generic function does not
> have an antiderivative expressed in terms of simple functions,
That surprises me. From my experience, French students are generally
quite well trained in mathematics, and I would expect most American
high-school students to understand that fact. They are commonly told
that there is a fundamental difference between taking derivatives and
doing the opposite.
Also, what benefit does the CAS give you in such a case? There are two
possibilities: a) The CAS comes up with some function of higher
mathematics as an antiderivative, which will not tell your student
anything; b) the CAS returns the unevaluated expression, in effect
saying: "I can't do this". If case b) applies, how is that supposed to
help? How is that better than the student having tried various ways to
find the solution him/herself, having failed to do so, and this way
maybe even having obtained some intuition of what it means to find an
antiderivative, and why this is a difficult problem in general? Or
even worse, what if c) you have a more "realistic" example (one that
is not meant to be solved by hand), with your CAS returning a result
spanning about five pages of text (which you will not be able to read
on your puny little calculator anyway)? What will the student learn
from that, other than that some mathematics is really complicated?
In conclusion, I am afraid I can't buy your optimism re: CAS in
high-school education. It could well be that I am missing something,
but I don't see what it could be. Maybe if you could give a concrete
example?
Maxwell
> "Jean-Yves Avenard" <jean...@NOSPAMavenard.org> wrote in message news:<Wprz8.153$b5....@newsfeeds.bigpond.com>...
> > Hundred of them were involved in the process.
>
> I don't know what kind of teachers were involved, but speaking for
> myself (teaching at a higher level than what the Xpander might have
> been targeted at, mind you) I simply cannot see a useful place for
> this device.
Wow, so you mean they didn't ask you ? Come on, who the hell you
think you are?
> I would ask the question: What benefit does it give the
> student that s/he cannot obtain otherwise?
What kind of question is that? If you are a teacher (as you say) you
must know that always there are many ways to do everything. I can't
understand how "a teacher" could be so obtuse.
> > The HP49G was made in response to the HP calculator community
>
> That was one of the fundamental mistakes: The calculator was designed
> based on requests from a very non-representative group of HP 48
> addicts, rather than based on what potential future customers might
> have been interested in.
How do you know that ? Are you a fortune-teller ?
> Most people have never used RPN and are initially put off by it, so
> you have to accommodate them. Afterwards, they may learn by themselves
> that RPN is a good idea.
Excuse me? How old are you? All our life, my colleagues and I have
used RPN. Do you live in a desert or what?
Ok lady, We have seen you always have the correct answer for
everything. You can not be a teacher.. or God forbid you were a
teacher.
Richard Garner
> "Jean-Yves Avenard" <jean...@NOSPAMavenard.org> wrote in message
news:<Wprz8.153$b5....@newsfeeds.bigpond.com>...
> > The HP49G was made in response to the HP calculator community
>
> That was one of the fundamental mistakes: The calculator was designed
> based on requests from a very non-representative group of HP 48
> addicts, rather than based on what potential future customers might
> have been interested in.
> You end up with a calculator that everybody that already has an HP 48
> will buy, but nobody else.
> You end up with a calculator that is sold without a manual, since the
> few people who are interested in the device can simply use their old
> HP 48 manuals.
> You end up with a product that fails in the market place.
> Congratulations.
I think both of these statements are wrong.
If they had listoned to the people in the calculator community that use
their calculators on a day to day basis to do work and not play games, they
would have made an upgrade to the 42s. That is what we needed. I like my
48GX, but it is very dificult for me to program on the fly. The 41/42, you
could start a program and stop and save it from time to time or stop and
come back to it when you decided where you wanted to go next. The 48, from
my experiance, you have to have the program finished on paper before you
even start entering it into the machine and if it's not just right, no save
until ALL the i's are dotted and t's crossed. No middle ground, finish it
or dump it, that is what I don't like about the 48 or the 49.
Parisse Bernard
> telling me that your description above is what happens in French
> schools, are you? I would expect that in France, like in any other
> country in the world, the teacher would make an effort to explain the
> concepts in question, so that even the less gifted students can
> understand.
>
Of course teachers will make efforts to explain to less gifted students.
My point was that students are all different, and some can understand
maths concepts following other paths than you (most probably) and me
did, i.e. only with paper and pencil. If you refuse them the possibility
to use other pedagocical approach (e.g. using a calculator), you will
close them the door, not necessarily because they can not understand
the concept, but because they do more errors doing technical
calculations when they try examples with paper and pencil.
> Are you really suggesting that the CAS can replace the teacher you
> described above? I think this is entirely unrealistic. No CAS I know
> can do that. No CAS I know can explain the concepts to a student.
>
Because you think explaining a concept with
definition/theorem/demonstration
Another way to understand a concept is
exemples/conjectures/generalization -> theorem
For example if you want to explain recurring sequences (and their
application) u_{n+1}=f(u_n), you can do a lot of experimentation
using a CAS, compute derivatives of f, make the relationship
between max|f'| and the convergence. You can even generalize to u_n
being a vector or a matrix.
Another example is diagonalization of matrices, if you want
to show some non trivial examples of Jordan cycles, you will
try matrices of dimension 4. Would you really do these examples
by hand?
>
>>Of course accepting CAS does not mean you
>>only tell the student "you can use soft xxx if you want", it means
>>you learn them using a CAS and you illustrate the concepts you
>>are teaching using the CAS
>>
>
> O.k., but here is where I disagree: You can do the same illustrations
> without a CAS, and I don't believe that these illustrations gain in
> any significant way through the use of CAS.
>
See above my examples.
>
>>(which BTW permits to make non-academic
>>examples. I'm always disturbed by the fact that most students
>>have a wrong picture of many maths aspects because all the
>>exercices we give are made to be solved by hand. For example
>>most students do not know that a generic function does not
>>have an antiderivative expressed in terms of simple functions,
>>
>
> That surprises me. From my experience, French students are generally
> quite well trained in mathematics, and I would expect most American
> high-school students to understand that fact. They are commonly told
> that there is a fundamental difference between taking derivatives and
> doing the opposite.
>
But all the exercices we give to them have an antiderivative.
and all polynomials have simple factors. Just check your textbooks.
Of course you will tell them it's not the real world, but they
won't believe you because they get their grade by doing the opposite.
> Also, what benefit does the CAS give you in such a case? There are two
> possibilities: a) The CAS comes up with some function of higher
> mathematics as an antiderivative, which will not tell your student
> anything; b) the CAS returns the unevaluated expression, in effect
> saying: "I can't do this". If case b) applies, how is that supposed to
> help? How is that better than the student having tried various ways to
> find the solution him/herself, having failed to do so, and this way
> maybe even having obtained some intuition of what it means to find an
> antiderivative, and why this is a difficult problem in general?
Again, this will apply to a student which is able to do calculations
without errors. The other students doing it by hand will just
come to the conclusion that he made an error.
> Or
> even worse, what if c) you have a more "realistic" example (one that
> is not meant to be solved by hand), with your CAS returning a result
> spanning about five pages of text (which you will not be able to read
> on your puny little calculator anyway)? What will the student learn
> from that, other than that some mathematics is really complicated?
>
Maybe he will learn that the unevaluated form is probably a better
form, that if what he wants is a numerical answer, he should just
forget the antiderivative and go for quadratures. Same for
extracting the roots of a 4-th order polynomial.
> In conclusion, I am afraid I can't buy your optimism re: CAS in
> high-school education. It could well be that I am missing something,
> but I don't see what it could be. Maybe if you could give a concrete
> example?
>
See above. These are examples for 1st/2nd year at University where I
teach. It's more difficult for me to find interesting examples at
lower levels where I don't teach, but there are people working on
this here in France. At least you can use the calc to check your
answer. One interesting point in your answer is that you found French
students to be mathematically well trained, then maybe we should
connect this to the fact that CAS are encouraged and allowed in
high-schools (one of the reason the 40G was sold in France and not
in the US) and that France is one of the country where the density
of graphing calculator is the highest.
Helen
> ... not necessarily because they can not understand
> the concept, but because they do more errors doing technical
> calculations when they try examples with paper and pencil.
Hmm, that is a valid point, I have to admit. Preventing the kind of
silly mistakes that students are prone to make (forgetting factors,
switching signs, etc.) is valuable. These kinds of errors can waste a
lot of time, and students learn little by having to find them
manually.
> Because you think explaining a concept with
> definition/theorem/demonstration
True.
> Another way to understand a concept is
> exemples/conjectures/generalization -> theorem
> For example if you want to explain recurring sequences (and their
> application) u_{n+1}=f(u_n), you can do a lot of experimentation
> using a CAS, compute derivatives of f, make the relationship
> between max|f'| and the convergence. You can even generalize to u_n
> being a vector or a matrix.
> Another example is diagonalization of matrices, if you want
> to show some non trivial examples of Jordan cycles, you will
> try matrices of dimension 4. Would you really do these examples
> by hand?
These are very good examples, I have to admit. They are not at the
high-school level, but nevertheless, you do have a point there.
> Maybe he will learn that the unevaluated form is probably a better
> form, that if what he wants is a numerical answer, he should just
> forget the antiderivative and go for quadratures. Same for
> extracting the roots of a 4-th order polynomial.
Again, good points here.
> One interesting point in your answer is that you found French
> students to be mathematically well trained, then maybe we should
> connect this to the fact that CAS are encouraged and allowed in
> high-schools (one of the reason the 40G was sold in France and not
> in the US) and that France is one of the country where the density
> of graphing calculator is the highest.
No, I don't think it has a lot to do with that. I suspect it is more
of a cultural thing; French students appeared to be well-trained in
math even before graphical calculators or calcs with CAS became
available. In fact, it may be the other way round: Because of their
good math background, they may be more interested in using such
calculators. (In addition, there is this issue with standardized tests
in the US, which disallow certain types of calculators, which I
suspect is one of the major reasons for not offering the HP40G here)
In any case, you do have good arguments for your position, and I find
that I have to rethink my stance as to the utility of CA in education.
However, what about the following thought: CAS on PCs are much more
powerful than anything available on a calculator. In addition, because
of the larger screen real estate, you can present much more
sophisticated content on a PC. Thus, you can design an "electronic
textbook" using, say, Maple or Mathematica, which would complement
traditional content of a textbook with "live" examples and exercises
that students can explore. Clearly, such an electronic textbook would
do everything you said above, and more, and could be an ideal learning
tool (and, of course, first examples of such "books" are already
available). In particular, it would be much more useful than a little
calculator with all its limitations. Now, assuming that the computers
to run such things become affordable to every student (which is a safe
bet, given the past history of personal computing), do you think there
is still a place for calculators with CAS?
Parisse Bernard
> No, I don't think it has a lot to do with that. I suspect it is more
> of a cultural thing; French students appeared to be well-trained in
> math even before graphical calculators or calcs with CAS became
> available. In fact, it may be the other way round: Because of their
> good math background, they may be more interested in using such
> calculators. (In addition, there is this issue with standardized tests
> in the US, which disallow certain types of calculators, which I
> suspect is one of the major reasons for not offering the HP40G here)
>
I agree that the connection does not prove anything.
> However, what about the following thought: CAS on PCs are much more
> powerful than anything available on a calculator. In addition, because
> of the larger screen real estate, you can present much more
> sophisticated content on a PC. Thus, you can design an "electronic
> textbook" using, say, Maple or Mathematica, which would complement
> traditional content of a textbook with "live" examples and exercises
> that students can explore. Clearly, such an electronic textbook would
> do everything you said above, and more, and could be an ideal learning
> tool (and, of course, first examples of such "books" are already
> available). In particular, it would be much more useful than a little
> calculator with all its limitations. Now, assuming that the computers
> to run such things become affordable to every student (which is a safe
> bet, given the past history of personal computing), do you think there
> is still a place for calculators with CAS?
>
You are right that an electronic textbook would be much better than
a calculator because you would have 1000* faster hardware, a better
screen, a better keyboard (assuming the e-textbook is *not* like
a laptop because I don't think teachers would love to teach in face
of the back of screens). But you must also consider price,
support (TCO) and the risk to break the e-textbook or that someone
steals it in a typical school environment. I guess such an
e-textbook would cost around or more than 500$ for the hardware +
? for the software (where you can replace ? by 0 if you use free
software, but that requires teachers writing free educationnal soft).
Compare to less than 100$ for most calcs (including the 40G). I'm
convinced that calculators (classical calculators like HP4xG/TI89
or low-priced PDA with a keyboard) have a futur, including CAS
calculators, assuming you can run the same CAS application on the
PDA and on your PC so that you can choose the right tool depending
on the situtation (that's exactly what I want to do with xcas BTW).
Now the question would be to be able to convince HP (maybe one
should replace HP by another company).
Cyrille de Brébisson
> However, what about the following thought: CAS on PCs are much more
> powerful than anything available on a calculator. In addition, because
> of the larger screen real estate, you can present much more
> sophisticated content on a PC. Thus, you can design an "electronic
> textbook" using, say, Maple or Mathematica, which would complement
> traditional content of a textbook with "live" examples and exercises
> that students can explore. Clearly, such an electronic textbook would
> do everything you said above, and more, and could be an ideal learning
> tool (and, of course, first examples of such "books" are already
> available). In particular, it would be much more useful than a little
> calculator with all its limitations. Now, assuming that the computers
> to run such things become affordable to every student (which is a safe
> bet, given the past history of personal computing), do you think there
> is still a place for calculators with CAS?
Well, my calculator (or more exactly my HP49 emulator, running on my
Jornada) fits in my pocket, is quite cheap, is limited in functionality to a
known state, does not take space on my desk, the other students can not see
what I have on my screen, does not have a big and noise keyboard, is robust
and almost unbreakable. All these are big advantages when it comes to
teaching, and exams.
I can still see a future for this type of device, although not as big as it
was when the HP41 was at it's peek.
regards, Cyrille
Cyrille de Brébisson
> If they had listoned to the people in the calculator community that use
> their calculators on a day to day basis to do work and not play games,
they
> would have made an upgrade to the 42s. That is what we needed. I like my
> 48GX, but it is very dificult for me to program on the fly. The 41/42,
you
> could start a program and stop and save it from time to time or stop and
> come back to it when you decided where you wanted to go next. The 48,
from
> my experiance, you have to have the program finished on paper before you
> even start entering it into the machine and if it's not just right, no
save
> until ALL the i's are dotted and t's crossed. No middle ground, finish it
> or dump it, that is what I don't like about the 48 or the 49.
Well, I am sorry, but I will have to disegree with that.
first, the HP49 was made with the input of the comunity. Remember it was
designed by proheminent members of this comunity, and by peoples who are
active players of this newsgroup. It was designed taking into account the
teachers, the programmers, the hackers and even the marketing folks!
The fact is, despite how good it was, the 42s is not generic enought and the
demand for such calculator is not as big as for a 49 type calculator.
remember, barely anyboddy even program the 49 type of calculator, and even
less ever program 42s type calculators.
as for your programming technics, personnaly, I have no problems starting to
work direclty on the calculator, and the only times in my life where I ever
had to write a program on paper was during computer sciences exam, and I
hated it. even when I was a newbie on my HP48SX, I was programming directly
on my calculator without going through a paper (or similar) phase.
anyway, what you can always do if you need to leave the command line while
entering an incomplete program is to:
- always use the shifted program menu entry to enter the program structure
in order to get the opening and clossing statements of the programming
structure (so your program is always sytaxily correct)
- use the halt command to 'suspend' the editing
- put a C$ $ at the top of the command line to create a string of the
content of the command line (and therefore not become 'enoyed' by the sytax
error.
regards, Cyrille
Peter Karp
[CAS in teaching -- helpfull or not?]
As a student I always liked to have tools to visualize, try and
explore the field I'm interested in. A CAS or a powerful calculator
like the HP48/49 helps me to try out things and to see that I'm "on
the right way" in learning. Especially when I'm at home and no other
student or teacher is "available" I have sort of an electronical
"expert" at hand then. A CAS/calc allows me to check my solutions. I
guess you'll argue that I just can take examples from a book and
compare the solution there. Yes, that's true. But when I don't find
the answer I can check parts of a calculation easy with a HP48 or a
CAS (BTW the HP48/49 is _much_ faster to use for many things and
doesn't need time to boot... :-) This can help to find where one has
made an error in the calculation, which might be a logic error or just
a missing number or something like that. Or it's also not that seldom
that a book contains an error and trying to find the solution with a
CAS will help a learner not to waste hours to find the right answer,
where it already is there and just a prining error is in the book.
That happend to me more than one time!
Also the route to show examples and then to get to the concept can
often be helpfull. I'm well aware that it's not always legitimate to
try some examples and then to generalize to find/understand the
algorithm. But it _often_ works and helps a lot.
When I teached things (not math) I often experienced that it's better
not to explain too much at once and not to explain too much detail at
first, because that will "hide" the main concept. In math an idea
could be to explain the basic concept and then as a homework for the
students to let them find out why/when the concept will be "valid" (I
hope my english is good enough to express what I try to say :-) This
additional journey to learn more about the subject can be greatly made
easier (or even made be possible, because otherwise it would take
hours to do some calculations which are not too interesting in
themself) with a CAS or a HP48/49 (or similar).
My math teacher explained _never_ something with a graph too us. After
all explanations he might show us a graph to demonstrate and visualize
the concept. He's a great teacher, but I think that it often (not
always!) would have been easier to visualize something first, so that
the students can see where the route will go and maybe also to explain
why and where that math will be needed in engineering or other "life
situations". That can help to "wake up" the student and to make him
more interested to understand the following subject. And then with a
CAS (especially at home) the student will be able to redo some
experiments and strengthen his knowledge.
I guess that using a CAS will just make fun and therefore help
students to get/stay interested in the subject.
Greetings from Cologne
Peter
--
Great HP48/49 links:
http://www.hpcalc.org
http://move.to/hpkb
to find *old* postings search:
http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search
Marchel
> Parisse Bernard <par...@fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr> wrote in message news:<3CCF77AB...@fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr>...
> Hmm, that is a valid point, I have to admit. Preventing the kind of
> silly mistakes that students are prone to make (forgetting factors,
> switching signs, etc.) is valuable. These kinds of errors can waste a
> lot of time, and students learn little by having to find them
> manually.
Except, if their problem is beyond realm of calculator functionality,
they don't even know how to solve it. I wonder, how much of
today math science was achieved with computers and
how much with paper and pencil.
Jack
Jean-Yves Avenard
"Cyrille de Brébisson" <cyrille_de...@hp.com> wrote in message
news:aap26r$epf$1...@web1.cup.hp.com...
> as for your programming technics, personnaly, I have no problems starting
to
> work direclty on the calculator, and the only times in my life where I
ever
> had to write a program on paper was during computer sciences exam, and I
> hated it. even when I was a newbie on my HP48SX, I was programming
directly
> on my calculator without going through a paper (or similar) phase.
> anyway, what you can always do if you need to leave the command line while
> entering an incomplete program is to:
Ahhh, that's why !! That explains a lot of things now.. :)
Don't look anywhere else I found the reason for all the existing software
"problems" :)
Jean-Yves
JEEjohn
GHMoh...@yahoo.com (Helen) writes:
>No, I don't think it has a lot to do with that. I suspect it is more
>of a cultural thing; French students appeared to be well-trained in
>math even before graphical calculators or calcs with CAS became
>available. In fact, it may be the other way round: Because of their
>good math background, they may be more interested in using such
>calculators. (In addition, there is this issue with standardized tests
>in the US, which disallow certain types of calculators, which I
>suspect is one of the major reasons for not offering the HP40G here)
My understanding of the reason why US students are not as good in
math is because US High School math teachs "cook-book"
solutions. That is, if the student cannot find a similar "solution"
in his book, then (s)he cannot solve it.
US students are not required to start "thinking" until they are in College.
The good students will do this on their own and they are the power
users of the HP48s & HP49s.
I also want to say that I relunctantly agreed with many of Helen's comments.
Myself, I couldv'e used any old scientific calculator for the first 10 years
after I got my engineering degree - so I didn't need anything fancy.
Even now, for the repeititive calculations I use Excel spreadsheet.
I mentioned some years before that if you want to appeal to the
non-financial professionals you need to have something that's
a cross between a PDA and a calculator. To do the calculations
quickly, you still need the keyboard. What I would really like is
an HP48 type programmable graphing calculator with a good
database and spreadsheet, along with the other standard PDA
software (calender, address book, etc.). Even better would be
a vertical format clamsheel type design (large vertical screen
on the top half, keys on the bottom half).
The database and spreadsheet should be "seamlessly" integrated
with the calculator software. In my line of work, I would put the
various engineering tables I use into the database or spreadsheet
so I wouldn't have to go and find the table any time I need it.
Tables of things like dimensions of structural shapes & nuts & bolts,
material properties, & many others.
The only problem is that there is no "Engineering PDA" market.
Or is it that nobody has tried?
John Edry
ColinC
Jean-Yves
You and I both know that Ginger the Chicken that sits on on Cyrille's
monitor actually does the Coding. :-)
Regards
Colin
Veli-Pekka Nousiainen
news:20020502195239...@mb-mj.aol.com...
>
> I mentioned some years before that if you want to appeal to the
> non-financial professionals you need to have something that's
> a cross between a PDA and a calculator. To do the calculations
> quickly, you still need the keyboard. What I would really like is
> an HP48 type programmable graphing calculator with a good
> database and spreadsheet, along with the other standard PDA
> software (calender, address book, etc.). Even better would be
> a vertical format clamsheel type design (large vertical screen
> on the top half, keys on the bottom half).
I'd buy a HP-200LX format Calculator any day.
1) The keytops would have to say SIN, e^X, 1/X, etc..
as any calculator should
2) Keyboard overlays could have A,B,C, and QWERTY and
many application overlays (spreadsheet, wordprocessor, db)
3) Shift, Ctrl, Alt, are the shift keys, Alt Gr is the alpha key:
a long hold would lock and a second click would cancel the shift;
shift & hold levels should work like in the 49G. HP 4x emulators.
XSCALE could be a suitable CPU. RPL could be one language.
Twelve soft menu keys (two rows in a vertical model) below the LCD.
One more column of keys to the 200LX design for foreign languages.
Flatter than the 200LX, two slots of CF II plus a secure smartcard.
Stuff a GPRS phone card to the first and IBM drive to the second.
Simple clear backlit grayscale LCD - no extras - no pens to miss.
VPN
Wartan Hachaturow
Veli-Pekka> X I'd buy a HP-200LX format Calculator any day.
Veli-Pekka> 1) The keytops would have to say SIN, e^X, 1/X, etc..
Veli-Pekka> as any calculator should
Veli-Pekka> 2) Keyboard overlays could have A,B,C, and QWERTY and
Veli-Pekka> many application overlays (spreadsheet, wordprocessor, db)
...
I'd also buy that one any day.
One reason I buyed HP49G rather than Palm is a keyboard input.
I _really_ hate those graffiti inputs, and things like Zaurus
are too priced for me..
One thing I miss on HP49G is a Python interpreter, which is
available on Palm. Yes, I know I've got *RPL, but having some
language like Python or Ruby would rule :)
--
Regards, Wartan.
"Computers are not intelligent. They only think they are."
Nick Karagiaouroglou
> n...@imos-consulting.com (Nick Karagiaouroglou) wrote in message news:<cd9ca36b.0204...@posting.google.com>...
> > Of course not computer algebra itself but computer algebra as the tool
> > for doing mathematics. As one door for entering the math universe.
>
> That is a very important point, and one you are getting completely
> wrong, IMO. CA is not a tool for entering the universe of mathematics,
> anymore than, say, computer-controlled offset printing machines are
> the tools for entering the universe of literature. In order to use CAS
> profitably, you already have to know a lot of mathematics.
When a student has learned for example to solve some kind of problems
and can "do maths by hand", then a CAS can be used as a "very quick
(and hopefully correctly working) hand", in order to explore more
complex problems of the same kind, which could be source of confusion
and errors, not because the underlying mathematics are unknown to the
student, but simply because of size/complexity. So the elimination
(hopefully) of the problem of the too complex intermediate steps lets
someone just have the result and work further with it, without having
to work a couple of days on, say, simplification of terms and the
like, and thus coming to troubles again and again, because some
exponent, variable, function, whatsoever was written erroneously while
doing all the necessary steps inbetween. Not to speak about the useful
and fruitful concept of visualisation of mathematical concepts, which
gets more and more hard to imagine with growing complexity.
> > *That* is the pity. That we have tools for making an easy entrance to
> > a very fascinating world, which could activate some more grey cells,
> > but instead of this we expect a black box to solve some integrals.
>
> There is no "easy entrance" into the world of mathematics. Quite
> likely you have learnt so much mathematics in your life that you have
> all but forgotten this fundamental truth.
Fuindamental truths again? We had that, didn't we? ;-)
The only fundamental truth, if there is such a thing, is that heavens
is the limit.
> Are you seriously suggesting
> that anybody would be able to use a CAS, without a deep knowledge of
> the mathematics involved?
No, no, no, madam! Of course not! Using CAS without good knowledge of
the corresponding mathematics is not what I meant. I don't believe
that this could work. What I meant is, first learn the mathematics
involved, then use the CAS to further explore all these things, that
would remain almost unknown because only a couple of people have the
patience to do them by hand. Example: Go figure out how the projection
of stellate(truncate(icosahedron))) on a certain rotational elipsoid
looks like, without having Mathematica, Maple or something else that
does this for you. You know of course how "the construction recipe"
works, but how long would it take to do that yourself?
> And then even learn something in the
> process? Have you ever taught mathematics at any level?
Yes, at many many levels. And was very pleased to see what a good
influence such machines like the HP49G had on the students. Instead of
sitting there and writing the stuff on the blackboard, they started
playing, thinking of other examples, examiming what happens if they
change this or that, and so on. ( Some of them tried a whole bunch of
test functions with many parameters as candidates for wave functions
of some molecules, minimizing energies with parameter variation. That
was a small triumph! :-) )
> Maybe I am old-fashioned, but my experience with my own children tells
> me that you cannot teach them to run before they can walk. As an
> example, IMO it would be disastrous to give calculators to
> six-year-olds in order to provide them with an "easy entrance" into
> some of the basic mathematical concepts relating to whole numbers
> (counting, adding, subtracting, etc.). I believe the same is true, at
> a different level, for high-school math, college math, etc.
I hope that I made clear what I meant. Not run before you walk, but
walk, run, then take a CAS and fly.
> > Instead of typing your input in the input lines of mathematica, you
> > could also write it on the screen, this doesn't change anything of the
> > inner workings of the CAS.
>
> But it also does not change the fact that what you write on that
> screen can potentially be very complex, and the (intermediate) output
> usually is even more complex. What you describe above does not change
> any of this at all.
It will be exactly as complex when you have to type it in, so compare
the two types of input for the same complexity. What is then easier?
To type or to write?
Greetings,
Nick.
Nick Karagiaouroglou
---snipped rest---
> However, what about the following thought: CAS on PCs are much more
> powerful than anything available on a calculator. In addition, because
> of the larger screen real estate, you can present much more
> sophisticated content on a PC.
You heard of flexible thin layer screens, didn't you? Imagine such a
screen with a tiny "PC-like" machine and good CAS-software.
> Thus, you can design an "electronic
> textbook" using, say, Maple or Mathematica, which would complement
> traditional content of a textbook with "live" examples and exercises
> that students can explore. Clearly, such an electronic textbook would
> do everything you said above, and more, and could be an ideal learning
> tool (and, of course, first examples of such "books" are already
> available). In particular, it would be much more useful than a little
> calculator with all its limitations. Now, assuming that the computers
> to run such things become affordable to every student (which is a safe
> bet, given the past history of personal computing),
Ha! Affordable to every student! Where do you live Helen? There are
countries where the calculator itself is already much too expensive,
and you talk about the whole PC+Software combinations as "affordable
to every student"? There are places where students live under the
worst conditions, having to search for something to eat in places
where you wouldn't believe that someone would go!! Let's tell them
about the above "affordability" of such a PC and software, and see
what they have to say. By the way, saying that there is no market for
a calculator with a CAS, you are thieving the smiles and joy of
students that have just seen what a parabola looks like on the small
screen of their calcs in some villages with poor inhabitants that
simply can't buy anything else for their children. Go tell those
people that the HP49G should not be used and they should buy a PC
instead. Has the prosperity already made people out of us, that
completely forgot about poverty???
> do you think there
> is still a place for calculators with CAS?
YES!
Greetings,
Nick.
Helen
> You heard of flexible thin layer screens, didn't you?
I heard of them, but have never seen any.
> Imagine such a screen with a tiny "PC-like" machine and good CAS-software.
That would be a very compact notebook PC, not a calculator. Have you
seen the new Sony Vaio-U? 6.4" XGA LCD, running WinXP. Folded up it's
barely larger than an HP 49G.
> Ha! Affordable to every student! Where do you live Helen?
I was talking about the future.
> There are places where students live under the
> worst conditions, having to search for something to eat in places
> where you wouldn't believe that someone would go!!
I am well aware of that. Are you suggesting this kind of student would
be interested in buying a graphing calculator with CAS? Tell me, why
and how in the world would these students spend what is a fortune to
them on such a device? Who is the one being unrealistic now?
> Let's tell them about the above "affordability" of such a PC and software,
> and see what they have to say.
Well, you go right ahead and tell them about those wonderful graphical
calculators. After all, they are a bargain at only about a hundred US
Dollars. That's more than a year's family income to them...
> By the way, saying that there is no market for
> a calculator with a CAS, you are thieving the smiles and joy of
> students that have just seen what a parabola looks like on the small
> screen of their calcs in some villages with poor inhabitants that
> simply can't buy anything else for their children.
I'm all in tears. I am truly sorry, but I think you are entirely out
of touch with reality there. Not to mention that if your poor students
want to know what a parabola looks like, they can simply draw one with
a pencil and paper. Same way I did when I was in school.
And believe it or not, I did learn some math, despite never having had
a smile on my face, being as I was deprived of the vital benefit of
graphing calculators...
James Maxwell
>
> That would be a very compact notebook PC,
No. That is not a "very compact notebook PC" either. They are different
things.
> > Let's tell them about the above "affordability" of such a PC and software,
> > and see what they have to say.
>
> Well, you go right ahead and tell them about those wonderful graphical
> calculators. After all, they are a bargain at only about a hundred US
> Dollars. That's more than a year's family income to them...
Come on. You know what he is trying to say. Don't be stupid.
> I'm all in tears. I am truly sorry, but I think you are entirely out
> of touch with reality there. Not to mention that if your poor students
> want to know what a parabola looks like, they can simply draw one with
> a pencil and paper. Same way I did when I was in school.
This is one of the reasons we think you are not a teacher. Look what you
are saying !!. Do you talk with people ? I think you don't.
> And believe it or not, I did learn some math, despite never having had
> a smile on my face, being as I was deprived of the vital benefit of
> graphing calculators...
So ?. We are not talking about you. Wake up !
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Nick Karagiaouroglou
> n...@imos-consulting.com (Nick Karagiaouroglou) wrote in message news:<cd9ca36b.02050...@posting.google.com>...
> > You heard of flexible thin layer screens, didn't you?
>
> I heard of them, but have never seen any.
>
> > Imagine such a screen with a tiny "PC-like" machine and good CAS-software.
>
> That would be a very compact notebook PC, not a calculator. Have you
> seen the new Sony Vaio-U? 6.4" XGA LCD, running WinXP. Folded up it's
> barely larger than an HP 49G.
>
> > Ha! Affordable to every student! Where do you live Helen?
>
> I was talking about the future.
Even in the future the price of a notebook will be higher than the
price of a calculator with a CAS.
> > There are places where students live under the
> > worst conditions, having to search for something to eat in places
> > where you wouldn't believe that someone would go!!
>
> I am well aware of that. Are you suggesting this kind of student would
> be interested in buying a graphing calculator with CAS? Tell me, why
> and how in the world would these students spend what is a fortune to
> them on such a device? Who is the one being unrealistic now?
Because the money for a notebook with the adaquate software is 5
fortunes to those people. You are unrealistic (and very diplomatic!)
saying that the calculator is expensive (which it really is), but
saying not a single word about how much more expensive the notebook
would be.
> > Let's tell them about the above "affordability" of such a PC and software,
> > and see what they have to say.
>
> Well, you go right ahead and tell them about those wonderful graphical
> calculators. After all, they are a bargain at only about a hundred US
> Dollars. That's more than a year's family income to them...
While of course the few thousands of dollars for a notebook and maple
or mathematica are a very economical!
> > By the way, saying that there is no market for
> > a calculator with a CAS, you are thieving the smiles and joy of
> > students that have just seen what a parabola looks like on the small
> > screen of their calcs in some villages with poor inhabitants that
> > simply can't buy anything else for their children.
>
> I'm all in tears.
Good for your eyes!
> I am truly sorry, but I think you are entirely out
> of touch with reality there. Not to mention that if your poor students
> want to know what a parabola looks like, they can simply draw one with
> a pencil and paper. Same way I did when I was in school.
You know that the word parabola is meant metaphorically here. Besides,
visualization of even "easier" things can help a lot.
> And believe it or not, I did learn some math, despite never having had
> a smile on my face, being as I was deprived of the vital benefit of
> graphing calculators...
I also didn't have the chance of buying an advanced calculator when I
was going to school. So the rule you make, is like: "I didn't have
that, and so they should also not have that"? You can be against such
calculators as strongly as you wish. This is not going to change
anything. They will still be bought and used.
Greetings,
Nick.
Helen
> price of a calculator with a CAS.
Well, if such calculators still exist then, that is.
> While of course the few thousands of dollars for a notebook and maple
> or mathematica are a very economical!
You could conceive of arrangements where these notebooks, with the
appropriate software, would be part of the standard equipment in a
school, just like textbooks, or furniture for that matter. In fact,
there is at least one college in the US (in dentistry) that has
replaced the usual stack of textbooks students use during their
four-year career with notebook computers carrying all of the software
and the textbooks they need in electronic form. In that case, given
the exorbitant prices for specialized textbooks, students are actually
saving money. Now, this is not a high-school I am talking about, but
in principle, such schools could do similar things. If they strike a
deal with some OEM and a bunch of ISVs, they could probably get decent
notebooks plus software for lease at very favorable conditions. And,
as I said above, you could arrange things such that this equipment is
paid for out of the school budget, rather than by individual students.
You say the same thing could be done for calculators? True, but a
calculator is a much more limited device; you can't put any textbooks
on them, you can't write term papers on them, you can't browse the
internet, etc., etc.
> I also didn't have the chance of buying an advanced calculator when I
> was going to school. So the rule you make, is like: "I didn't have
> that, and so they should also not have that"?
No, of course not. However, I have seen too many glitzy technological
innovations in the field of education fail to deliver any benefits at
all to be quite as optimistic about these things as you are. That does
not mean I must be right and you are wrong, it's just my observation.
What I see is that generally mathematical competence in particular has
declined significantly since I went to school, despite (or because?)
of all those technical gadgets.
I know I am revealing my age here, but when I went to school we still
learned how to use slide rules. And you know what? There are some
things that the use of a slide rule teaches students that no
calculator can give you. Should we go back to slide rules then? No,
that would be _really_ unrealistic, but I have a distinct feeling that
there is something that got lost when we abandoned the slide rule.
Specifically, we often see students presenting results that are wildly
off (by orders of magnitude, or wrong sign, etc.), never having given
any thought to the question of whether that number their calculator
was showing makes any sense at all.
> They will still be bought and used.
That remains to be seen. With HP out of the picture, and thus any
incentive for TI to develop or innovate in that area gone, who is
going to develop and sell them?
Bhuvanesh
> > > There are places where students live under the
> > > worst conditions, having to search for something to eat in places
> > > where you wouldn't believe that someone would go!!
And such students would definitely not buy a graphing calculator, HP
or otherwise. Even schools cannot afford them.
> > I am well aware of that. Are you suggesting this kind of student would
> > be interested in buying a graphing calculator with CAS? Tell me, why
> > and how in the world would these students spend what is a fortune to
> > them on such a device? Who is the one being unrealistic now?
>
> Because the money for a notebook with the adaquate software is 5
> fortunes to those people. You are unrealistic (and very diplomatic!)
> saying that the calculator is expensive (which it really is), but
> saying not a single word about how much more expensive the notebook
> would be.
I see I need to go further up and read the beginning of this
discussion, but both an HP49G and a notebook are really out of the
question for the kinds of students you are talking about.
--
Bhuvanesh
Wayne Brown
> I know I am revealing my age here, but when I went to school we still
> learned how to use slide rules. And you know what? There are some
> things that the use of a slide rule teaches students that no
> calculator can give you. Should we go back to slide rules then? No,
> that would be _really_ unrealistic, but I have a distinct feeling that
> there is something that got lost when we abandoned the slide rule.
> Specifically, we often see students presenting results that are wildly
> off (by orders of magnitude, or wrong sign, etc.), never having given
> any thought to the question of whether that number their calculator
> was showing makes any sense at all.
Actually, some teachers still teach their students to use
slide rules. I'm a member of a slide rule collectors' group
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sliderule) and we've had requests
from several teachers for slide rules to use in class. Each time,
members of the group have donated slipsticks to send to the teachers.
The most recent donations were in April; 15 rules were sent to a teacher
in Oregon, and another 26 rules to a teacher in New York City. So there
are at least a few students out there who are still learning first-hand
the importance of the difference between precision and accuracy.
I still have the slide rule I used in high school, as well as a few others
I've picked up over the years, and carry a pocket rule (a Pickett N600-ES)
for quick calculations.
--
Wayne Brown | "When your tail's in a crack, you improvise
fwb...@bellsouth.net | if you're good enough. Otherwise you give
| your pelt to the trapper."
"e^(i*pi) = -1" -- Euler | -- John Myers Myers, "Silverlock"
James Maxwell
Wow ! We're surprised... you are getting better.
> I know I am revealing my age here,
No, not here. We caught you many messages before. Imagine if We would
speak english.
> but when I went to school we still
> learned how to use slide rules. And you know what? There are some
> things that the use of a slide rule teaches students that no
> calculator can give you. Should we go back to slide rules then? No,
> that would be _really_ unrealistic, but I have a distinct feeling that
> there is something that got lost when we abandoned the slide rule.
> Specifically, we often see students presenting results that are wildly
> off (by orders of magnitude, or wrong sign, etc.), never having given
> any thought to the question of whether that number their calculator
> was showing makes any sense at all.
Results of calculations with no sense is very common... yeah ! But that
is not because of calculators or slide rules, it's because they don't
know what they are doing. We've never used a slide rule, not even We've
touched one and We never wrote a result with no sense. Sorry,
math_physics_enginering is not for everybody... In the same way biology
was not for me....and chemistry for me... :)