48g vs. TI-82
Stephane Jantzen
: silly input forms and such then yes, it's slower. If you use the
: no-frills input (which is also more versatile and powerful), you can
: move much faster. I owned (and still do) a TI-85 but when I upgraded to
: a GX, I was hooked. The HP's much more powerful and, when you
: understand the input mechanisms and the RPN notation, is much faster
: and more efficient. Advertisement mode off.
Obviously, all that is wrong ! The TI-8x series (I have a TI-85) uses a Z80,
at 6 MHz for the '85, 4 MHz for the '82, as the Saturn is a 4-bit processor, at
2 MHz on a '48s. Just do the following test : S=0;for I=0 to 1000, just add I^I
to S. The '85 is 2.5 - 3 times faster than a '48s, and 1.5 times than a '48g.
Use RPL, and (Pseudo)-Basic for the TI. I know one or two HP-owners who have
been quite surprised !
Moreover, the TI is (far) easier to program. Of course, some symbolic operations
can't be done, but WHO really use them ? Some people just can't efficiently use
RPN (I can't), and TI's logic is the closer of the natural way thinking. That's
what EOS has been made for.
Let's speak about assembly language : The TI is fully programmmable in assembly,
the link software is free FROM TEXAS INSTRUMENTS, and the cable link can easily
be done. Needless to say, the Z80 is far faster than the Saturn. But as program-
ming in Assembly on TI's is quite new, amazing things have not been done yet.
Just look at newsgroup bit.listserv.calc-ti, which is the newsgroup aimed at
hacking TI series.
Just one more thing : HP keyboard is RIDICULOUS ! How can you decently use it
more than 10 minutes ?
--
Stephane JANTZEN.
I don't say HP is a bad calculator. I just say that TI isn't as bad as HP owners
think or want us to think.
Funny thing : People on TI newsgroup NEVER compare TI-8x to HP !
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephane 'Peekaboo' Jantzen - stephane...@scinfo.u-nancy.fr - E.S.I.A.L.
"Without the pain there'd be no learning _O_
Without the hurting we'd never change" - Kate Bush |<
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sirkkala Petri
: : Well, it depends on what you mean by 'faster.' If you go through the
: : silly input forms and such then yes, it's slower. If you use the
: : no-frills input (which is also more versatile and powerful), you can
: : move much faster. I owned (and still do) a TI-85 but when I upgraded to
: : a GX, I was hooked. The HP's much more powerful and, when you
: : understand the input mechanisms and the RPN notation, is much faster
: : and more efficient. Advertisement mode off.
: Obviously, all that is wrong ! The TI-8x series (I have a TI-85) uses a Z80,
: at 6 MHz for the '85, 4 MHz for the '82, as the Saturn is a 4-bit processor, at
: 2 MHz on a '48s. Just do the following test : S=0;for I=0 to 1000, just add I^I
: to S. The '85 is 2.5 - 3 times faster than a '48s, and 1.5 times than a '48g.
You just forgot to mention the actual times. :)
Have you tried Sigma(I^2,0,1000)? What is the point of this kind of speed
comparision? I have never found repeating some simple thing a thousand times
interesting, I would rather prefer logic over barbarian force.
Another "Speed comparision":
1. Type in 2 lists of equal length, say 15 entrys.
2. Substract the second from the first.
3. Take the sin of the resulting list.
4. Duplicate the result.
4. Reverse another of the lists.
5. Repeat 3 times from point 2
See, there is another way of machine being fast.
My time unpracticed: 65 secs.
: Use RPL, and (Pseudo)-Basic for the TI. I know one or two HP-owners who have
: been quite surprised !
:
: Moreover, the TI is (far) easier to program. Of course, some symbolic operations
: can't be done, but WHO really use them ? Some people just can't efficiently use
: RPN (I can't), and TI's logic is the closer of the natural way thinking. That's
: what EOS has been made for.
: Let's speak about assembly language : The TI is fully programmmable in assembly,
: the link software is free FROM TEXAS INSTRUMENTS, and the cable link can easily
: be done. Needless to say, the Z80 is far faster than the Saturn. But as program-
: ming in Assembly on TI's is quite new, amazing things have not been done yet.
: Just look at newsgroup bit.listserv.calc-ti, which is the newsgroup aimed at
: hacking TI series.
: Just one more thing : HP keyboard is RIDICULOUS ! How can you decently use it
: more than 10 minutes ?
As much as any computer keyboard is RIDICULOUS. They all have tiny buttons all
over them and they do not even slightly resemle an Jig-saw. It is not made for
typing your essee. It is made for calculational needs.
: --
: Stephane JANTZEN.
: I don't say HP is a bad calculator. I just say that TI isn't as bad as HP owners
: think or want us to think.
: Funny thing : People on TI newsgroup NEVER compare TI-8x to HP !
No they don't, they come here to do it!
: --
Michael Carr
>: at 6 MHz for the '85, 4 MHz for the '82, as the Saturn is a 4-bit processor, at
>: 2 MHz on a '48s. Just do the following test : S=0;for I=0 to 1000, just add I^I
>: to S. The '85 is 2.5 - 3 times faster than a '48s, and 1.5 times than a '48g.
One has to be careful in associating clock speeds with performance. The Cray
CS6400 superserver is clocked at only 60 MHz, but it is has a SPEC rate of
101969 compared to the Pentium-based 90 MHz machine's SPEC rate of only
2137. A lot of what contributes to a machine's performance is its architecture,
system code, user interface, instruction set, and other factors which are
unrelated to clock speed.
My personal opinion on this subject is that HP could have done some things
to improve the performance of the 48 series. True, a faster clock would be
desirable. However, the system code itself (especially the display routines) seem
to be relatively slow. Look at display routines written by 3rd party freeware
programmers; these routines are typically much faster than HP's own display
routines. Why?
On the other hand, the HP-48 provides a reasonable amount of handheld
power. In the field, the speed is probably reasonable, but if you need both
a high-power machine and high-speed, I'd opt for a spreadsheet or a math
package running on a PC (of course, that's also high-price, comparatively
speaking). In my own experience, I use the HP-48 only for its most limited
functions (+,-,*,/) 90% of the time. Once in a while, I may solve a simultaneous
equation. However, if a computational task requires anything more than
that, I'd rather enter the information in such a way that I can see it all,
save it to disk, and print it more easily. That only works if your task
involves sitting at a desk or other similar situations where such tools
are readily available.
(speed info was compiled from //ftp://ftp.cdf.toronto.edu/pub/spectable and
http://www.cray.com)
____________________________________________________________________________
Michael Carr m-c...@onu.edu
Junior, Electrical Engineering Ohio Northern University
http://www.onu.edu/~mcarr Talk page to mc...@clstu-01.onu.edu
____________________________________________________________________________
Desnogues
> CS6400 superserver is clocked at only 60 MHz, but it is has a SPEC rate of
> 101969 compared to the Pentium-based 90 MHz machine's SPEC rate of only
> 2137. A lot of what contributes to a machine's performance is its architecture,
> system code, user interface, instruction set, and other factors which are
> unrelated to clock speed.
For instance the Saturn can compute with 64 bits numbers and the Z80
can only handle 16 bits number. And the Saturn has more registers than
the poor old Z80. And the architecture of the Saturn is adequate to the
RPL language.
> Look at display routines written by 3rd party freeware
> programmers; these routines are typically much faster than HP's own display
> routines. Why?
I think it's due to the fact ROM are slower than RAM. For instance
you can speed up PC video BIOS by copying it into RAM. Of course that's
not the only reason: very often the ROM writers prefer a good code that
works to a fast code more involved.
--
Laurent Desnogues
Sebastien Bacquart
: For instance the Saturn can compute with 64 bits numbers and the Z80
: can only handle 16 bits number. And the Saturn has more registers than
: the poor old Z80. And the architecture of the Saturn is adequate to the
: RPL language.
I don't agree !!!
Z80 has more registers than Saturn: they are named A,F,B,C,D,E,H,L
(which can be linked in AF,BC,DE,HL),IX,IY and there are secondary registers
with the same name which can accessed by EXX and EXX AF,AF' instructions.
(I code in Z80 on my old Amstrad 6128 and in Saturn on my HP48)
HPulstar
Tuomas Haarala
: RPN (I can't), and TI's logic is the closer of the natural way thinking. That's
: what EOS has been made for.
Does TI have some kind of logic in using? ;-) (Don't consider as a
flame or somekind of verbal assault)
I have been using HP now for about one year, and it didn't take
much time to learn the basics. User interface is easy, to me it
seems like some kind of semi-GUI. TI is way more cryptic to me.
(And I like HP's font better.) Anyway, HP is calculator for me,
even if it isn't as fast as some other. TI might be someone
else's calculator, but not mine.
: Let's speak about assembly language : The TI is fully programmmable in assembly,
: the link software is free FROM TEXAS INSTRUMENTS, and the cable link can easily
: be done.
Where can I find instructions for TI's cable? It costs about $100
in here, and it has large amount of SMD's inside the connector.
(And HP's cable hasn't)
: Just one more thing : HP keyboard is RIDICULOUS ! How can you decently
: use it more than 10 minutes ?
Very easily. It is in logic order, and easy to configure in
way I like.
: Funny thing : People on TI newsgroup NEVER compare TI-8x to HP !
Looks like they come on HP-group to do that. :-)
-Tuoppi-
Stephane Jantzen
: Who adds 50 numbers in a row? I doubt you could do it faster on the TI (I
: don't know why the TI would be faster based on keyboard layout), but maybe
: you could, but so what? It is not a realistic calculation.
: Try ((10.34(sin(5^2+10^2(pi))+167.32x10^3 cos(sqrt(1/(1+sqrt(5^2+10^2))))
: *sin(4^3/(15+16)^5)/cos(15*(45^3-23^4)*ln(67.123))
Easy : I'd type :
"((10.34(sin(5^2+10^2(pi))+167.32x10^3 cos(sqrt(1/(1+sqrt(5^2+10^2))))
: *sin(4^3/(15+16)^5)/cos(15*(45^3-23^4)*ln(67.123))"
: >You've swapped cause and consequences : I came here only because a friend of
: >mine told me that wrong things were said about the TI. I can accept that people
: >tell that HP is better than TI, but only if his arguments are something else
: >than hey-guy-I-have-this-wonderful-fast-and-grey-shaded-tetris-and-I-am-sure-
: >-that-your-TI-can't-do-that.
: Who cares about Tetris, I don't think that is what endears most people to
: the HP.
: TIs don't suck, they just aren't as good at doing some things as the HP is.
In YOUR humble opinion.
: As for the useabilty of the more complex function of the HP, I seriously
: think HP needs to work on that. Graphing is such a simple thing, why did HP
: have to make it such a pain.
JHTU...@news.delphi.com
the TIs (85s being dominant, followed by 81s, then the newer 82s), except
for two people; myself and the person who let me see his one day who got
me hooked. I still have my Ti-85, and it definately has its uses, but I
prefer my HP hands down any day. It's not that the TIs are bad machines,
it's just thet they aren't for me (and I'll wager not for most people
here). I've yet to sell it, however, for two main reasons: in case I
don't know how to do something I need on a test with the GX (okay, this
reason is lame now; I've become proficient with the GX since I used this
excuse last time), and as a glorified battery holder should my HP decide
to die. The head of the Math department at our school prefers the TI-82
over the HP for several reasons, the least of which isn't that it's
easier to do classroom demonstrations when everyone has a TI. Also, TIs
are less expensive that HPs, and I'm sure this has something to do with
it; students aren't rich and when a 50 - 75 dollar machine will do the
job (and is seemingly easier to use), that's what they'll get.
Just my two cents. Next time I'll even separate it into more than one
paragraph, free of charge!
--
Chip Turner
I don't speak for HP when I ramble here.
I don't work for HP when I don't ramble here.
Joshua N Vanderberg
Stephane Jantzen <jan...@scinfo.u-nancy.fr> wrote:
>In article <3gbhsd$k...@news.acns.nwu.edu> (27 Jan 1995 19:34:37 GMT) Joshua N Vanderberg (jnv...@lulu.acns.nwu.edu) wrote:
>: Try ((10.34(sin(5^2+10^2(pi))+167.32x10^3 cos(sqrt(1/(1+sqrt(5^2+10^2))))
>: *sin(4^3/(15+16)^5)/cos(15*(45^3-23^4)*ln(67.123))
>
>Easy : I'd type :
>"((10.34(sin(5^2+10^2(pi))+167.32x10^3 cos(sqrt(1/(1+sqrt(5^2+10^2))))
> *sin(4^3/(15+16)^5)/cos(15*(45^3-23^4)*ln(67.123))"
You missed the point entirely. Sure you CAN type it in, but how fast can
you do it. What about errors? When you have the whole thing typed in it
fills the screen, a pain to edit. So maybe you break it down into smaller
parts. Again a pain, you have to store intermediate results either on
paper, or in variables. It is not at all easy on a TI to deal with complex
expressions. THAT is the advantage of RPN - it handles something like the
above equations with ease - in an entirely natural fashion.
__
Josh Vander Berg B O H I C A!!! jo...@nwu.edu
"True genius: the intelligence that knows its
chen...@imap1.asu.edu
: My school has also jumped on the TI bandwagon. Everyone has one of
: for two people; myself and the person who let me see his one day who got
: me hooked. I still have my Ti-85, and it definately has its uses, but I
: prefer my HP hands down any day. It's not that the TIs are bad machines,
: it's just thet they aren't for me (and I'll wager not for most people
: here). I've yet to sell it, however, for two main reasons: in case I
: don't know how to do something I need on a test with the GX (okay, this
: reason is lame now; I've become proficient with the GX since I used this
: excuse last time)
Hey bro, same here! Now I carry _3_ calculators with me - my
trusty 48GX, my TI-85 (that I couldn't bear to sell off) and an old
non-graphing Casio (just in case the Physics or Chem. instructor prohibits
calculators with memory). (No nerd comments please!) - I end up using the
GX for most things, but checking the basic math with the simplex CASIO
(just in case I forgot to change from RADIANS to Degrees mode).
I've been reading the views in this thread, and others like it
(when I was deciding on whether to buy a GX or not). I must admit that
the HP _was_ definitely a little difficult to use at first - I had to
learn RPN (or unlearn EOS - as most HP'ers would like to call it) in
addition to getting used to using the stack and system flags. The
programming language was/is also something most people aren't used to (it
ain't BASIC ok). In comparison, I could make use of the TI the day I got
it, since it's basic opperation is virtually identical to any "standard"
calculator.
Another thing, was RPN chosen because some PhD.'s research shows
that it is _really_ how humans prefer to think? Or is it just because the
engineers got lazy? ;-) I mean, surely a LISP-type (RPN) language is much
easier to program than a tokenized high-level interpreter? What's the
inside scoop?
Anyway, once you get used to the 'different' way of calculating,
you'll definitely find the HP to be a more powerful and (much-much more)
versatile tool than the TI.
Cheerio!
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Lim Chen-I | Human, Technocrat, Internet supporter, |
| E-Mail: chen...@imap1.asu.edu | and poor EE Undergraduate. |
+------------> "Wisdom comes not from age, but from thought." <------------+
Stephane Jantzen
: you do it. What about errors? When you have the whole thing typed in it
: fills the screen, a pain to edit. So maybe you break it down into smaller
: parts. Again a pain, you have to store intermediate results either on
: paper, or in variables. It is not at all easy on a TI to deal with complex
: expressions. THAT is the advantage of RPN - it handles something like the
: above equations with ease - in an entirely natural fashion.
Maybe, but I've never had to type such a long formula :)
Seth Arnold
depending on how much $$$ one has... I of course, wasn't going to buy a
TI when I have a GX with a RAM card...
My first math class: Functions, Statistics, and Trig. Only 3 HPs, my
Gx, and two other S. My teacher hates us (We think, anyway) as he won't
let us talk during class, on how to build the equivelent HP programs.
My second math class: Discrete/precalc. Only 2 HPs, my GX, and a
freinds SX. This teacher is one of the best I have ever had; also,
since there are no programs to write, I have no problem with the class,
etc...
This adds up to 4 HP48s out of probably 45 or 50 students. I managed to
convince about 6 or so students that the HP48 is better, and they like
it. So, in total, this is about 10 HP48s, out of roughly 1000 students.
I tried. :-)
--
Seth Arnold | hid...@agora.rdrop.com | finger for pgp key
Seth Arnold
Stephane Jantzen <jan...@scinfo.u-nancy.fr> wrote:
>
>I was speaking of the way you have to hurt keyboard to make it work : try to
>make a 50-different-values addition in the less time : I'll beat you for sure
>(and I'm not a keyboard-master :) )
You sure about that? Really sure? Call me sometime, or send me email.
:-)
>-that-your-TI-can't-do-that. How many people among the ones who say that TIs
>suck REALLY know how a TI work ? Don't make me laugh ! EVEN 99% of TI-owners
>can't say what their machine can do !
That is one REALLY BIG reason not to use it. If you don't know how it
works, how can it be much fun? That is one reason why I will never use
a macintrash...
Audin Malmin
Tuomas Haarala <tuo...@janus.otol.fi> wrote:
>Stephane Jantzen (jan...@scinfo.u-nancy.fr) wrote:
>: Let's speak about assembly language : The TI is fully programmmable in assembly,
>: the link software is free FROM TEXAS INSTRUMENTS, and the cable link can easily
>: be done.
>
> Where can I find instructions for TI's cable? It costs about $100
> in here, and it has large amount of SMD's inside the connector.
> (And HP's cable hasn't)
than anything. having to use the custom menu and all... The HP allows
you to keep asm programs as normal files... exec. them is as easy as
exec. anything on a PC.
And you can't possably get any better than the HPs link setup. A simple
(standard except for the connector) serial cable. No extra ICs to deal
with. And the HP speaks both Kermit and Xmodem. Anyone with any
terminal software can speak to an HP.
Then, of course, you can easly edit an HP program on a PC... it's a pain
in the ass to edit an TI program outside the TI itself. And i won't even
get into the limitations of the TI's basic programming language.
>
>: Just one more thing : HP keyboard is RIDICULOUS ! How can you decently
>: use it more than 10 minutes ?
>
> Very easily. It is in logic order, and easy to configure in
> way I like.
I rather like the HPs keyboard... Nice feel, i think... but then i
don't have any major problems with the TIs keyboard either.
>: Funny thing : People on TI newsgroup NEVER compare TI-8x to HP !
>
> Looks like they come on HP-group to do that. :-)
Yes they do... there was a comparison thread in bit.listserve.calc-ti
just a few weeks ago. I even posted to it...
I personally like the HPs better than the TIs... mainly since HP seems
to encourage programming on their machine. (going so far as to provide
an assembler and low-level hardware info)... TI, on the other hand,
seems to want to keep people from using their machine to the fullest.
providing no way to easily program it in asm...even the OS seems to fight
asm programs....(dynamicly moving things around in mem...)... (not that
i'm saying they did this to prevent asm programming... just that they
should have thought about the possability and tried to provide for it).
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Audin Malmin | http://www.halcyon.com/amalmin | ama...@halcyon.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephane Jantzen
: In article <3g8g2a$8...@tethys.otol.fi>,
: Tuomas Haarala <tuo...@janus.otol.fi> wrote:
: you to keep asm programs as normal files... exec. them is as easy as
: exec. anything on a PC.
What does it mean ? You CAN enter asm programs. No matter how they are
put in (quite simple, indeed)
: And you can't possably get any better than the HPs link setup. A simple
: (standard except for the connector) serial cable. No extra ICs to deal
: with. And the HP speaks both Kermit and Xmodem. Anyone with any
: terminal software can speak to an HP.
: I personally like the HPs better than the TIs... mainly since HP seems
: to encourage programming on their machine. (going so far as to provide
: an assembler and low-level hardware info)... TI, on the other hand,
: seems to want to keep people from using their machine to the fullest.
: providing no way to easily program it in asm...even the OS seems to fight
: asm programs....(dynamicly moving things around in mem...)... (not that
: i'm saying they did this to prevent asm programming... just that they
: should have thought about the possability and tried to provide for it).
If the HP is SO FAR better, why is there so few HP's in american schools
or University ? (Something like 1-5%, according to a genuine HP owner).
You really don't need all this power, do you ? Just to make stats or
numeric calculus ?
Jason Burrell
: If the HP is SO FAR better, why is there so few HP's in american schools
: or University ? (Something like 1-5%, according to a genuine HP owner).
: You really don't need all this power, do you ? Just to make stats or
: numeric calculus ?
If UNIX is SO FAR better, why is there so few UNIX systems in American
homes? (Come'on, DOS reeks, but it isn't for this group. This is an analogy)
I run a UNIX system. I have a DOS system. I use the UNIX system more because
its easier to get work done, doesn't crash, and is far, far more capable.
Have you considered the four or five posts here by people who say their
school requested that they buy a TI-85/TI-82? I don't know about you, but if
I don't have a calculator and I'm told I need one, and I don't know jack
about them, I'll probably buy what they recommend.
Some TI'er post a list of the features that are on his/her calculator, and a
HP user do the same. Then you can shoot at that.
Stephane Jantzen
: about them, I'll probably buy what they recommend.
Indeed, my question was : Why don't they recommend HPs ? Here, both TI and HP
cost the same price.
Dimitri Janczak
: If the HP is SO FAR better, why is there so few HP's in american schools
: or University ? (Something like 1-5%, according to a genuine HP owner).
: You really don't need all this power, do you ? Just to make stats or
: numeric calculus ?
Peek, try a "Prepa" in France, and you'll understand the benefits of having
a HP48 for litteral differentation or matrix
In addition, having more power is quite useful : even if you don't use it
immediatly, you'll use it in the future (Like the capacity of a hard disk,
BTW how full is your HD :)))))) )
--
| Dimitri Janczak | "J'voudrais pas crever sans savoir si les quatre |
| jan...@scinfo.u-nancy.fr | saisons ne sont vraiment que quatre"(Boris Vian) |
| Ecole Superieure d'Informatique et Applications de Lorraine E.S.I.A.L. |
T Perez
: Try ((10.34(sin(5^2+10^2(pi))+167.32x10^3 cos(sqrt(1/(1+sqrt(5^2+10^2))))
: *sin(4^3/(15+16)^5)/cos(15*(45^3-23^4)*ln(67.123))
: I betcha anything I could do this MUCH faster on an HP. I have tried things
: like this on the TI. Forget direct entry, you have to build up the entire
: expression (or break it into parts and keep track of results on paper, or
: store intermediary results in variables, which is a pain). So you have this
: algebraic expression that can take up the entire screen. A pain to look at,
: hard to decipher - how do you tell if there are errors in it. HARD to keep
: track of the nested parenthesis (can't tell you how many times I have had
: that problem in the TI) It is just MUCH simpler on the HP. You keep track
: of the nesting as you go, intermediary results are stored naturally on the
: stack and flow naturally back into your calculations. And the thing is the
: example I give about is extrememly simple compared to some of the
: nightmarish stuff I have to deal with.
Hell, just plug the expression into the equation writer. That way it
looks just like it would on paper.
Hal
T Perez
: Maybe, but I've never had to type such a long formula :)
Go into Engineering. You _MUST_ be in something else.
Hal Perez
tpe...@tiger.lsu.edu
jean-yves avenard
> : Maybe, but I've never had to type such a long formula :)
>
> Go into Engineering. You _MUST_ be in something else.
> Hal Perez
> tpe...@tiger.lsu.edu
>
Why do you want to discuss with this sort of person ???
When I saw his message there is only two word : "Poor France ..."
Let's him playing with his beautiful TI-85, and stop this conversation.
It's not the place for it. This person will never understand ..
--
+---------------------------------+----------+--------------------------------+
| | | Access: v23, 1200/75, even, 7/1|
| Jean-Yves Avenard | All that | - 3615 STORM (France Only) |
| STORM Telematique SARL | you want,| - (33)-36431515 STORM |
| BP 47 | We can | Tel : (33)-09168953 |
| 91470 Limours (France) | DO ! | (33)-1-69051236 |
| | | Email : aven...@epita.fr |
+---------------------------------+----------+--------------------------------+
rwo...@primenet.com
>In article <3gk6r9$p...@news.halcyon.com> (31 Jan 1995 02:21:29 GMT) Audin Malmin (ama...@coho.halcyon.com) wrote:
>: In article <3g8g2a$8...@tethys.otol.fi>,
>: Tuomas Haarala <tuo...@janus.otol.fi> wrote:
>
>: you to keep asm programs as normal files... exec. them is as easy as
>: exec. anything on a PC.
>
>What does it mean ? You CAN enter asm programs. No matter how they are
>put in (quite simple, indeed)
>
>: And you can't possably get any better than the HPs link setup. A simple
>: (standard except for the connector) serial cable. No extra ICs to deal
>: with. And the HP speaks both Kermit and Xmodem. Anyone with any
>: terminal software can speak to an HP.
>
>: I personally like the HPs better than the TIs... mainly since HP seems
>: to encourage programming on their machine. (going so far as to provide
>: an assembler and low-level hardware info)... TI, on the other hand,
>: seems to want to keep people from using their machine to the fullest.
>: providing no way to easily program it in asm...even the OS seems to fight
>: asm programs....(dynamicly moving things around in mem...)... (not that
>: i'm saying they did this to prevent asm programming... just that they
>: should have thought about the possability and tried to provide for it).
>
>If the HP is SO FAR better, why is there so few HP's in american schools
>or University ? (Something like 1-5%, according to a genuine HP owner).
>You really don't need all this power, do you ? Just to make stats or
>numeric calculus ?
>
Probably because of all the 'freebies' and extra support TI gives the schools.
Similar in a way to how the Mac got such a lead in the educational field by
offering lots of support & extras to schools & left IBM in the dust. HP
calculators are superior because it is a professional choice, whenI purchased my
28S back in 1986-87 I KNEW I would not have to replace it for at least 5-6
years. It lasted 8.
If the TI is SO SUPERIOR in your opinion, why has HP got the most desired
calculators among scientific and business professionals? When I sold TI
and HP calcs, most of the schools ALWAYS recommended TI scientifics (as much as
10-15 years ago, usually the TI-3X series) These machines, with the tiny
buttons, invariably break down after 4-6 months with each keystroke "bouncing"
producing 5 entries for each keystroke (this has improved considerably lately).
Most of the people looking to replace HP calcs usually had an old one, usually 5
to 8 years old, that they are looking to retire. And they wanted nothing but
another HP. The 41 series had some of the most outstanding 3rd party support I
have ever seen, for a calculator even!
Also, most of the business students I have run across have their instructors
require the purchase of either an HP-12C or 17BII (the latter more often these
days) over any other calculator, including the BA-series TI's and HP's more
powerful 19BII. As for reliability, I would bet that quite a few of them are
still operational since their debut about 10 years ago. I would not say the
same for TI.
What this argument boils down to, is most probably:
1. How much to spend?
2. Is learning RPN is worth it?
3. What is the value of quality?
4. How much support?
///////////////////----------------------------------------------------------
// Robert Worne // E-mail: rwo...@primenet.com
// -=Team OS/2=- // IP Address: 192.83.199.156
///////////////////----------------------------------------------------------
Ram Naresh Gudavalli
: : If the HP is SO FAR better, why is there so few HP's in american schools
: : or University ? (Something like 1-5%, according to a genuine HP owner).
: : You really don't need all this power, do you ? Just to make stats or
: : numeric calculus ?
Do you know what you're saying? You are right about there being more
TI-85's in American High Schools. But, look at the teachers who use them.
All, but I think two (out of maybe 100) teachers in my school use a MAC, and
they still have tons of problems with it. "Oh! How do I get out of At
Ease again?" They don't have the time and possibly the learning curve to
learn the more complicated HP48GX (Except for JKH of course!).
And the students that use the 85 in my high scool!... they probably think
there are little men under the screen writing whatever they type!
So you're saying that the TI-85 is reputable because some
computer-illiterates use them?
Also:
A TI-82/85's usefulness ends in the classroom. Look at a couple days
back and you will see a post about someone wanting to make a darkroom
timer program for his HP that uses the IR, which the TI doesn't have.
That is just one example. Ever see a EduCalc catolog? It dedicates 16
pages of merchandise from 3rd party vendors. Only two things relating to
the TI-85 exist in the catalog: the calculator itself and the Graph Link,
which is $60+.
Here are just a few features that make the HP much better:
Directory stucture
IR Capability
Expansion ports (SX/GX)
Stack based OS
Standard Kermit/Xmodem Protocols
Library stuctures for Application Development
Symbolic Math Capability
Ability to take full control of the calc (Ever see SOL or the HP16C emulator?)
Flags
Better Screen Resolution
Lists
Units
Built-in Conic Section plotting
More Memory (GX)
Much more powerful Programming language (User-RPL)
Built-in Debugger (G/GX)
Better variable storage (All variables must be global on TI, as I recall)
Programming Support from HP (informal, that is...SASM.DOC, RPLMAN.DOC)
Equation Library that is integrated with the Solver (G/GX)
Many Books written by members of the R&D team at Corvallis
And some from outside HP...
about 10 different editors for the HP (Try to write an editor for the TI!)
2 Application Development Libs (Jazz and RPL48)
Tons of games (really good ones at that)
A lot of ROM cards for other fields besides just mathematics
A good Spreadsheet Program (EXAL)
A few PIM Software Libs
Symbolic Matrice programs...
And I'm sure other people in this group will be able to think of much
better reasons to own an HP that those which compelled me to buy one.
So the TI-85 might be faster and more people might have it but it doesn't
even compare to the HP's flexibility.
So what I'm saying is do yourself a favor. Go buy yourself an HP48GX and
when you walk out of your math class and put the TI away, take out the HP
and see what a real calculator can do :-)
Remember, this is my simply my opinion and I'm not trying to start a
flame war about the topic. Whenever I reply to a thread, I seem to reply
hard :-)
Ram Gudavalli
ra...@xnet.com
Norman Richards
>
>Probably because of all the 'freebies' and extra support TI gives the schools.
>Similar in a way to how the Mac got such a lead in the educational field by
>offering lots of support & extras to schools & left IBM in the dust. HP
>calculators are superior because it is a professional choice, whenI purchased my
>28S back in 1986-87 I KNEW I would not have to replace it for at least 5-6
>years. It lasted 8.
>Most of the people looking to replace HP calcs usually had an old one, usually 5
>to 8 years old, that they are looking to retire. And they wanted nothing but
>another HP. The 41 series had some of the most outstanding 3rd party support I
>have ever seen, for a calculator even!
>What this argument boils down to, is most probably:
>1. How much to spend?
>2. Is learning RPN is worth it?
>3. What is the value of quality?
>4. How much support?
HP for my EE classes and technical classes. It was the best investment I
have made in a calculator. Since my junior year in high school - I have
bought 4 calculators - 3 Casio (7000 series I believe) calculators and
one 48GX. Each of the casio's broke within a year - and I never managed to
figure out how to do everything I wanted to. My HP48 has outlasted the
combined 3 casio's and outperforms it.
My girlfirend - who is neither computer nor calculator literate - needed
a calculator for calculus. Her teacher recommended a TI. I recommended an
HP - but I didn't think it would be appropriate as it would require learning
RPN and is really more power than she needed. She ended up buying one of the
new casio models that is almost exactly like the TI's. She returned it about
3 days later becuase it was so bad. I bought her a used SX and she loves it.
She learned RPN in an hour and got the hang of directories not long
after. After the end of her first week she could graph, solve equations and
do just about everything she needs to do. Of course she doesn't know anything
about programming, but she really doesn't need that.
My point is - even to someone who isn't particularly technical - the HP can
come out on top when people actually look at it.
______________________________________________________________________________
o...@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu "Two roads diverged in a wood, and I -
I chose to climb the nearest tree.
And that has made all the difference."
JHTU...@news.delphi.com
>If the HP is SO FAR better, why is there so few HP's in american schools
>or University ? (Something like 1-5%, according to a genuine HP owner).
>You really don't need all this power, do you ? Just to make stats or
>numeric calculus ?
I was speaking to a genuine TI owner the other day and he said that
90% of TI users hate their calculators. Really, he did. Now let's not
ruin a perfectly ruined thread by trying to show by statistics that one
calculator is better than another. User base doesn't indicate 'best' or
worst. Everyone I know who ever used a TI and then took 10 minutes to
learn the HP and RPN loved the HP. Why didn't they buy one? They
already had a 100 dollar calculator and didn't have the money to spend on
a new one. Why didn't they originally buy a HP? Their instructor(s)
suggested a TI and they got one so they could keep up with the class with
minimal effort. Not a bad goal, particularly if your forte is not a
math or science.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chip Turner : jhtu...@delphi.com qua...@aol.com
"Chess is a beautiful mistress to whom we keep coming back, no matter
how many times she rejects us." -- Bent Larsen
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maxwell Daymon
: Stephane Jantzen (jan...@scinfo.u-nancy.fr) wrote:
: : If the HP is SO FAR better, why is there so few HP's in american schools
: : or University ? (Something like 1-5%, according to a genuine HP owner).
What calculators are used in schools means very little about anything
except marketing and propaganda.
: Have you considered the four or five posts here by people who say their
: school requested that they buy a TI-85/TI-82? I don't know about you, but if
My professor told me to get an TI-82 this semester. I directly went out
and bought an HP-48G. So did almost half the class.
: I don't have a calculator and I'm told I need one, and I don't know jack
: about them, I'll probably buy what they recommend.
I went in cold. I looked at both, examined both, used them in the store
for almost three hours (they didn't like that ;-)... I asked for an HP
and the clerk told me they wouldn't have any for a week.
Anyway, the TI had a very cheap "feel" and I couldn't do RPN with it. The
HP-48G could do both RPN and infix. The HP also had an IR port which is
turning out to be really nice.
------------------
Maxwell Daymon
mda...@rmii.com
------------------
Maxwell Daymon
: In article <3glak4$8...@nntp.crl.com> (31 Jan 1995 12:32:04 GMT) Jason Burrell (jbur...@crl.com) wrote:
: : about them, I'll probably buy what they recommend.
: Indeed, my question was : Why don't they recommend HPs ? Here, both TI and HP
: cost the same price.
I asked a professor today.
"The TI was easier to use."
"Have you USED the HP?"
"No."
"Did you KNOW that you don't have to use RPN?"
"No."
Hmmm...
stephen r mcgillivary
have used HP's since middle school (actually I got my first one, an
HP-11c in 4th grade, but it was basically for sub hunt). I've found
that RPN was basically a good way of keeping people from borrowing
and thus losing my calculator, because they couldn't find the =
key. As far as the 48 series goes, there are times that my 48g seems
too slow, the graphics and menu's tend to get in the way when in a hurry.
Which is why during a test you can always find a 42s in my bag.
Steve
Stephane Jantzen
: If the TI is SO SUPERIOR in your opinion, why has HP got the most desired
: calculators among scientific and business professionals? When I sold TI
: and HP calcs, most of the schools ALWAYS recommended TI scientifics (as much as
: ///////////////////----------------------------------------------------------
: // Robert Worne // E-mail: rwo...@primenet.com
: // -=Team OS/2=- // IP Address: 192.83.199.156
: ///////////////////----------------------------------------------------------
I only meant that the TI was not the awful shit that all the HP owners tend to
think :)
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephane 'Peekaboo' Jantzen - stephane...@scinfo.u-nancy.fr - E.S.I.A.L.
"Without the pain there'd be no learning _O_
Without the hurting we'd never change" - KaTe Bush |<
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephane Jantzen
: In article <3gkkba$1s...@tiger1.ocs.lsu.edu> tpe...@tiger.lsu.edu (T Perez) writes:
: Why do you want to discuss with this sort of person ???
: When I saw his message there is only two word : "Poor France ..."
This was not the silly answer it seemed to be : I just meant that here (in
France), people who often have a HP don't even have to type some things like
that, only additions/substractions. Why paying for a HP,so ?
: Let's him playing with his beautiful TI-85, and stop this conversation.
: It's not the place for it. This person will never understand ..
I know the TI is not the best. I can admit that some things are missing on TI's.
Stephane Jantzen
: Do you know what you're saying? You are right about there being more
: TI-85's in American High Schools. But, look at the teachers who use them.
: All, but I think two (out of maybe 100) teachers in my school use a MAC, and
: they still have tons of problems with it. "Oh! How do I get out of At
: Ease again?" They don't have the time and possibly the learning curve to
: learn the more complicated HP48GX (Except for JKH of course!).
This is what I say til the beginning : TI is more easy to use, even if it is
less powerful. Of course HP has features it hasn't. But why people think that
a simple-to-use product is systematically shit ?
: And the students that use the 85 in my high scool!... they probably think
: there are little men under the screen writing whatever they type!
: So you're saying that the TI-85 is reputable because some
: computer-illiterates use them?
Ya know, some computer students have TI (I am :) )
: Also:
: Directory stucture
right ! :)
: IR Capability
Is the provided TI cable so bad ?
: Expansion ports (SX/GX)
Right !
: Stack based OS
Well, hard to deal with !
: Standard Kermit/Xmodem Protocols
Yes
: Ability to take full control of the calc (Ever see SOL or the HP16C emulator?)
TI has (assembly)
: Better Screen Resolution
Very little difference, I think : TI is 126x63
: Lists
This is the problem for TIs :( : Only simple lists allowed ! (But matri-
ces are quite efficient.
: More Memory (GX)
GX price is twice TI's
: Better variable storage (All variables must be global on TI, as I recall)
That's true (and quite annoying)
: Equation Library that is integrated with the Solver (G/GX)
Not really fast, huh ?
For external stuff : as the assembly is quite new on TI : wait and see !
: So what I'm saying is do yourself a favor. Go buy yourself an HP48GX and
: when you walk out of your math class and put the TI away, take out the HP
: and see what a real calculator can do :-)
Well, I don't need a powerful calculator anymore :)
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephane 'Peekaboo' Jantzen - stephane...@scinfo.u-nancy.fr - E.S.I.A.L.
"Without the pain there'd be no learning _O_
Without the hurting we'd never change" - KaTe Bush |<
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
T Perez
: If the HP is SO FAR better, why is there so few HP's in american schools
: or University ? (Something like 1-5%, according to a genuine HP owner).
: You really don't need all this power, do you ? Just to make stats or
: numeric calculus ?
Although I am not 100% sure, I will guess the answer. The HP _starts_ at
$100 for the G and goes up to $200 for the GX. (Not to mention that
prices _just_ came down.) TI run b/w $75-100. What parent will pay $100
for the "low end" HP when they can pay $100 for the "high end" TI? That's
just the parent/thrifty philosophy. TI realized that and jumped into the
high schools and practically gave teachers a TI, making that the TI the
first high performance calc for the students to be interested in. I never
used the TI in HS. I used an old sharp scientific calc. I was first
introduced to the HP 4 years ago in collage and to the TI about two years
ago. My friend with the HP is in engineering. My friend with the TI is in
math education. I am in engineering. I have seen NO ONE in my engineering
or calculus classes with a TI. It's not technical enough. It's good for
doing basic math and programs. My ex-girlfriend took a class that
required a TI. She had to write a few programs. I helped her and it was a
joke. The TI is a good high school and non technical calculator, but for
real majors, you can't beat the HP.
Hal
Adam Felson
What creativity!
Letsee: leftparan leftparan leftparan 2 + 2 rightparan exponentiation 2
times leftparan leftparan... oh damn! lost track of all those parans.
Ian S Nelson
I think an important point is being missed here. The HP with out a
doubt does much more than the TI, you can't question that. In terms of
a calculator that is one of the more important features, ease plays a
part too, but the learning curve on calculators isn't that steep, if it
takes you 2 hours instead of 1 it doesn't really matter.
I think the reasons TIs are the calculators of choice for high schools
is because the students there are learning calculus and algebra and
geometry, all things the HP can do for you. There is not much insentive
for a student to learn how to integrate if he can just plug it in to his
calculator. It is essential that those kids learn how to do that, that
way when they buy the HP, they know when it is wrong (it's not too hard
to get a wrong answer on those types of equations either) Or they can
still do work when they break
their HP and have to wait a couple days to get another.
Would you drive your car on a bridge that was designed by a guy who
didn't check any of his calculations? I am a math major and have worked
with Maple, Mathmatica, the HP48, derive, TI calculators, and several
other packages over the years and have found each and every tool to fail
easily when you start throwing calculus at it. They are only tools and
should only be used if you have a sound knowledge of what is being done
and can do it yourself.
--
Ian S. Nelson <bon...@cmu.edu> finger for PGP key
Carnegie Mellon Math/Computer Science
My opinions are not the school's, although they should be!
rwo...@primenet.com
>In article <3gm67d$1...@news.primenet.com> (31 Jan 1995 20:23:09 GMT) rwo...@primenet.com wrote:
>I only meant that the TI was not the awful shit that all the HP owners tend to
>think :)
I'll concede that. However, until the TI-8X series came out, I DID think all
TI's were shit...
They are better now, but not good enough for my tastes.
syw...@imap2.asu.edu
TI82. It tooks me my entire winter break (that 2 weeks) to do it, and
never could get the timing right for the second or minute hand. I will
never going again try to program a TI82 anymore.
The HP48 was a lot simpler one you get used to it. I will only program
the TI only where it is simple program, other than that, the TI is pain
in the butt.
In my HS every math teacher used TI, I am the only one in the school that
know how to used a HP48 and I had the only HP on campus. The school kept
on buying TI, I think the school had something like a 1000 TI-81/82, so
is like 1000 to 1 ratio in my school. That from Algebra I to Calculus
(BC) AP. They all think is a lot simpler for the students and teachers to
used a TI than a HP. So I live with it.
Later,
Kin Yip Wong
Pine E-Mail: Garf...@ASU.Edu
chen...@imap1.asu.edu
: TI's are GREAT! Do a problem 10 times; get 10 different answers!
: What creativity!
: Letsee: leftparan leftparan leftparan 2 + 2 rightparan exponentiation 2
: times leftparan leftparan... oh damn! lost track of all those parans.
Er, not quite true. You see, the TI allows you to leave out the
right-parenthesis. So, SIN ((X^(2*(X+2)+(3*Z)-(2+Z
would equate just fine.
Now that I got that out, a few opinions...
Without doubt, the TI is no-comparison to the hp; as someone once
said, so appropriately, comparing the hp to the TI is like comparing an
aeroplane to a car. However, this does not mean the TI is completely
inferior to the hp. There are somethings the TI does better, and there
are comethings it simply cannot do. It's obvious that the TI was designed
specifically to be a "student's" multi-purpose calculator. It is easy to
use, straight forward (no obscure flags to set) and very intuitive - for
the hp, I can never remember the correct stack diagrams for many of the
functions (almost a thousand of them!). With the TI, everything works
with prompted user-input, and there is no need to lug the huge manual around.
OK, so the hp48g has input forms. I find those things too annoyingly slow
to be of any use. It's like a 3-second wait after each input, and almost
5-seconds to redraw the screen, which brings us to the next gripe: the
graphing, which is a _graphing_ calculator's main purpose after all, is
(no other way to put it) dead-slow. I have tried graphing the same graph
on both the TI-85 and the hp48gx at the same time, and the TI always wins
(not terribly complicated equations of course). I even tried setting the
hp to plot only dots, and it still loses out to a full plot on the TI!
Come on, this is really too much! If the hp is really technically
superior, why is it so slow? I mean, a pentium hooked up to a 64K
monochrome video card still loses out to a 386 on VLB! Many times, all I
need to do is to use my calculator to whip out a quick plot of an
equation. I cannot do this on the hp. Even a simple plot is a laborious
process - if you get the range wrong, you have to wait an eternity for it
to plot it again.
Well, that's really my only complaint about my GX. If Hp had 'only'
made its graphics about 4-times faster, I would probably be using it
more than my pc!
--
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Lim Chen-I | Human, Technocrat, Internet supporter, |
| E-Mail: chen...@imap1.asu.edu | and poor EE Undergraduate. |
+> "The power one attains is directly proportional to the work one does." <+
Lilian Pigallio
|> In article <AVENAR_J.9...@cation.epita.fr> (01 Feb 1995 01:53:15 GMT) jean-yves avenard (aven...@cation.epita.fr) wrote:
|> : In article <3gkkba$1s...@tiger1.ocs.lsu.edu> tpe...@tiger.lsu.edu (T Perez) writes:
|>
.....
|> : Let's him playing with his beautiful TI-85, and stop this conversation.
|> : It's not the place for it. This person will never understand ..
|>
|> I know the TI is not the best. I can admit that some things are missing on TI's.
|>
Que se passe t-il Stephane, tu as pris des calmants ??? Un ptit gars comme toi qui
n'en veut que pour la TI et qui finalement avoue ces (ses) faiblesses :)
--
__\/__
. / _ _ \ .
|\| (o)(o) |/|
@-.OOOo----oo----oOOO.-@
@ PIGALLIO Lilian @
@ piga...@essi.fr @
@_____________Oooo.____@
.oooO ( )
( ) ) /
\ ( (_/
\_)
Stephane Jantzen
: n'en veut que pour la TI et qui finalement avoue ces (ses) faiblesses :)
I won't reply in french here : check your mailbox :)
Dave Arnett
: I think the reasons TIs are the calculators of choice for high schools
: is because the students there are learning calculus and algebra and
: geometry, all things the HP can do for you. There is not much insentive
: for a student to learn how to integrate if he can just plug it in to his
: calculator. It is essential that those kids learn how to do that, that
: way when they buy the HP, they know when it is wrong (it's not too hard
: to get a wrong answer on those types of equations either) Or they can
: still do work when they break
: their HP and have to wait a couple days to get another.
: ...They are only tools and
: should only be used if you have a sound knowledge of what is being done
: and can do it yourself.
I agree with the basis but not necessarily the implications.
I think one of the worst tragedies is when someone uses a calculator to do
numerical manipulations which the user does not comprehend. To use the
machine to work deep and complex relationships amongst strings of functions
when the user understands each individual portion of the string is great.
Use a machine to deal with complexity. To let a calculator or computer to
crunch large data sets, such as big matrices, is another good use, so long
as the operator is using the machine to simplify the work, rather than as
a substitute for understanding.
When I wander over to chat with the folks who answer calculator customer
phone calls, their worst complaints are about folks who call with math
questions rather than calculator questions. They have a real tough time
dealing with folks whose problem is not how to operate the machine, but
with understanding what the machine is doing mathematically. It happens,
and it's a problem.
But does a machine like the 48 have anything to offer in a class which is
trying to teach algebra or calculus? I believe it does have a place, if
math instructors will understand the power of the tool.
For example, my high school math instructor taught me that the derivative of
sin(wt) wrt t is w*sin(wt). That was a nice rule. But if I'd seen a PLOT
of the derivative for various valeus of w, the MEANING of that mathematical
rule would have been much more clear.
Do you know that I never really understood the hyperbolic sine and hyperbolic
cosine functions through out high school? I didn't understand them through
my four years of college. I could get all of the values, no hassle. But
I didn't have a good mental model of the functions. I got that model when
I plotted hyperbolic cosine and cosine simultaneously on a 48. Then I
told the 48 to take the derivatives of both functions in the list, and plotted
the four resulting functions together. Viewing that ONE plot gave me more
useful understanding of the hyperbolic functions than all of the coursework
that led to my EE degree, and helped me relate the trig functions to the
hyperbolic functions in ways I never could before.
I hope math instructors at all levels will use the 48 in the classroom to
provide insight to the students without letting the class members take the
tool as a crutch.
Those are my ideas on the topic. Use the 48 to get past classroom drudgery
in providing insight about math, just as a professional uses the machine to
get past the drudgery of complex equations or large data sets. And do it in
a way that improves understanding without undermining rudimentary proficiency.
Dave.
------
I don't speak for HP when I post here.
Ram Naresh Gudavalli
[ Some stuff deleted]
: I think the reasons TIs are the calculators of choice for high schools
: is because the students there are learning calculus and algebra and
: geometry, all things the HP can do for you. There is not much insentive
: for a student to learn how to integrate if he can just plug it in to his
: calculator. It is essential that those kids learn how to do that, that
: way when they buy the HP, they know when it is wrong (it's not too hard
: to get a wrong answer on those types of equations either) Or they can
: still do work when they break
: their HP and have to wait a couple days to get another.
I'm a high school senior in Calc BC, and there is absolutely no way
anyone can pass my class or the AP test by integrating on the HP48.
Teachers don't mind which calculator the students use because there are
always ways to get the students to learn it. In fact, the only thing I
use on my 48 relating to math is PROOT, which I could do by hand via syn.
sub., and numeric calculations.
As for the numeric integration, most calcs can do that. However, in
my class, and on the AP test, you must write out the steps that led you
to your answer, so a calc can only verify a right answer.
: Would you drive your car on a bridge that was designed by a guy who
: didn't check any of his calculations? I am a math major and have worked
: with Maple, Mathmatica, the HP48, derive, TI calculators, and several
: other packages over the years and have found each and every tool to fail
: easily when you start throwing calculus at it. They are only tools and
: should only be used if you have a sound knowledge of what is being done
: and can do it yourself.
The HP48 can only symbolically integrate the simplest of equations.
Also, at least in my class, I am hardly ever asked to just plainly
integrate an equation. Most of the time I am asked to find the volume of
a revolved graph, SA of the same, etc, etc, etc... You won't be able to
do the problem if you don't know what you're doing.
The HP48S/SX/G/GX are allowed on the Calculus AB/BC AP test. This in
itself is proof that it isn't going to do anything for you if you don't
know what you're doing.
Ram Gudavalli
ra...@xnet.com
Maxwell Daymon
: equation. I cannot do this on the hp. Even a simple plot is a laborious
: to plot it again.
You CAN stop in mid-plot though. It's not as if you have to KEEP waiting.
joseph r novosel
: : RPN (I can't), and TI's logic is the closer of the natural way thinking. That's
: : what EOS has been made for.
: Does TI have some kind of logic in using? ;-) (Don't consider as a
: flame or somekind of verbal assault)
: I have been using HP now for about one year, and it didn't take
: much time to learn the basics. User interface is easy, to me it
: seems like some kind of semi-GUI. TI is way more cryptic to me.
: (And I like HP's font better.) Anyway, HP is calculator for me,
: even if it isn't as fast as some other. TI might be someone
: else's calculator, but not mine.
: : Let's speak about assembly language : The TI is fully programmmable in assembly,
: : the link software is free FROM TEXAS INSTRUMENTS, and the cable link can easily
: : be done.
: Where can I find instructions for TI's cable? It costs about $100
: in here, and it has large amount of SMD's inside the connector.
: (And HP's cable hasn't)
: : Just one more thing : HP keyboard is RIDICULOUS ! How can you decently
: : use it more than 10 minutes ?
: Very easily. It is in logic order, and easy to configure in
: way I like.
: : Funny thing : People on TI newsgroup NEVER compare TI-8x to HP !
: Looks like they come on HP-group to do that. :-)
: -Tuoppi-
Everyone is talking about the HP's processer vs. TI's.
How much RAM does a TI 85 have??
I believe that it is only < 32k and can NOT be expanded.
Enough said.
Joe Novosel
novo...@dekalb.dc.peachnet.edu
Are Nodland
tree from trn to prove it, I've never one this big :-). personally I have
this thread in my kill-file :)
[1] 48g vs. TI-82
(1)+-(1)
\-(1)
-( )--( )--(1)+-(1)--(1)+-(1)--(1)+-(1)
| | \-(1)
| \-(1)+-(1)--(1)+-(1)
| | \-(1)
| \-(1)
\-(1)+-(1)+-(1)+-(1)--(1)--(1)+-(1)--(1)--(1)--( )--(1)
| | | \-(1)
| | \-(1)
| |-(1)
| \-(1)
\-(1)--(1)+-(1)--(1)
|-(1)--( )--(1)
|-(1)+-(1)
| \-(1)
|-(1)
\-(1)
--
Warning: .signature files should be no longer than 4 lines.
(Only 4 lines of your .signature were posted.) ___MMM___
AARRRGGGHHH.....I hate this :-) (snipit from my newsreader) (0-0)
e-mail: nod...@kari.fm.unit.no -------------------------------oOO--(_)--OOo--
Sean Peisert
> there are little men under the screen writing whatever they type!
> So you're saying that the TI-85 is reputable because some
> computer-illiterates use them?
I use DOS, UNIX, and Macintosh and program in C, Pascal, and FORTRAN. I
also use a TI-82 :)
--
Sean Peisert
spei...@ucsd.edu
John King
: easily when you start throwing calculus at it. They are only tools and
: should only be used if you have a sound knowledge of what is being done
: and can do it yourself.
Good point. Look at all the noise about the Pentium glitch from the heavy
users. If they had been checking calculations on other platforms they
wouldn't have been so worried.
-jk
Ram Naresh Gudavalli
: > And the students that use the 85 in my high scool!... they probably think
I didn't say that everyone who uses a TI is computer-illiterate. My
point is that Jentzen's arguement about the TI being better because it is
more widely used in high schools than the HP is not a strong arguement.
But then again, you have the smiley face, so you didn't take it as a
flame, which is good :-)
Ram Gudavalli
ra...@xnet.com
Allan Howard
smart enough to double-check.
twanvds
First my position is that of an former TI-59(!) user which out grown it
and went on to a HP-41CX. From then on only HP was considered as a
potential new calculator.
No to the core of my reaction: why do teachers (American High School,
Dutch HBO or what you have) prefer and recommend a TI or TI-like
calculator in lieu of a HP?
I think that it has nothing to do whether the TI or HP is a better
calculator or the number of features available. Not even the differences
between RPN and the AOS approach. No , the most important reasons are
the following:
1. Control of the teaching process. If only on type of calculator is
being used i the class room a single explanation will do.
Moreover imagine the choas a subtle difference inthe outcomes of two
different machines will cause ;-). MOst teachers are not educated in
numerical mathematics, and how to explain the intricacies to a bunch of
yet non mathematicians?
2. The cost. TI are cheaper. But they still cost a lot of money $100 is
a lot for a thing only used for 4 years or even shorter due to defects.
IMHO if you do a course leading to a professional use of your calculator
a few bucks more is only investment into your future (albeit of
relatively little importance).
The reason why a school board doesn't consider this fact is simple that
on high school level it is virtually impossible to predict one's future.
Therefore the extra qualities (functionality as well as sheer performance)
offered by an HP48GX are of a marginal advantage to the majority of the pupils.
3. Difference in culture. The age difference between schoolboard/teacher
at one side and pupils on the other side causes the standard
misunderstanding. In this case is computer 'illiteracy' the most
notorious one. The teacher can not imagine that, when (s)he experiences
any trouble understanding a new concept in society (i.c. calculator and
later the appreciation of the difference between a HP and a TI) thier
pupils pick up the concept with ease!
Therefore a teacher has been tought to think of equations in their linear
representation therefore and AOS matches this thinking closely hence they feel
at ease with it. (Good marketing of TI BTW!).
They never had to resort to the notion of
locality (local variables, directories procedures) in their calculations (a
little corner on paper would do), thinking with these concepts is unkown
and therefore difficult.
I'm *not* saying that all teachers are old fashioned and anachronistic
thinkers. But progress on a large scale proceeds always slower than
desired in the eyes of the more lucky people who have some vision of the
future. A single teacher will love a HP user, but a school board simply
doesn't udnerstand the motivations of a HP user.
After all this nice talk I want to exclude one type of HP owner c.q.
programmer an that's the so-called `compulsive users' to which the HP
matters like a religion. In this case none af the above applies.
(flame material, I'm afraid. But since flames are considered a nuisance
on the net let's restrain our selves ;-)
Twan van der Schoot
Owner of a HP41CX, HP28C, HP48, HP48GX, TI-58(defect), and a TI-59 (still
working fine).
Anders Karlsen
|> jan...@scinfo.u-nancy.fr (Stephane Jantzen) writes:
|>
|> >If the HP is SO FAR better, why is there so few HP's in american schools
|> >or University ? (Something like 1-5%, according to a genuine HP owner).
|> >You really don't need all this power, do you ? Just to make stats or
|> >numeric calculus ?
|>
|> I was speaking to a genuine TI owner the other day and he said that
|> 90% of TI users hate their calculators. Really, he did. Now let's not
|> ruin a perfectly ruined thread by trying to show by statistics that one
|> calculator is better than another. User base doesn't indicate 'best' or
|> worst. Everyone I know who ever used a TI and then took 10 minutes to
|> learn the HP and RPN loved the HP. Why didn't they buy one? They
|> already had a 100 dollar calculator and didn't have the money to spend on
|> a new one. Why didn't they originally buy a HP? Their instructor(s)
|> suggested a TI and they got one so they could keep up with the class with
|> minimal effort. Not a bad goal, particularly if your forte is not a
|> math or science.
Here in Norway, there are much more HP's than 5%.
I have looked for the TI-calculators, but have yet to see
the TI-85 in the stores.
In fact, my university bookstore have all the 48's for sale,
among with some Casio models.
Anders Karlsen
Ian S Nelson
Naresh Gudavalli@ami
>
> [ Some stuff deleted]
>
> : I think the reasons TIs are the calculators of choice for high schools
> : is because the students there are learning calculus and algebra and
> : geometry, all things the HP can do for you. There is not much insentive
> : for a student to learn how to integrate if he can just plug it in to his
> : calculator. It is essential that those kids learn how to do that, that
> : way when they buy the HP, they know when it is wrong (it's not too hard
> : to get a wrong answer on those types of equations either) Or they can
> : still do work when they break
> : their HP and have to wait a couple days to get another.
>
> I'm a high school senior in Calc BC, and there is absolutely no way
> anyone can pass my class or the AP test by integrating on the HP48.
> Teachers don't mind which calculator the students use because there are
> always ways to get the students to learn it. In fact, the only thing I
> use on my 48 relating to math is PROOT, which I could do by hand via syn.
> sub., and numeric calculations.
>
> As for the numeric integration, most calcs can do that. However, in
> my class, and on the AP test, you must write out the steps that led you
> to your answer, so a calc can only verify a right answer.
Well, I got a 5 pretty easily on the test a few years back and my work
was very very sloppy, I'm not sure how well they check that except for
partial credit. regardless, homework and doing many many series,
integral, partials, etc is how you learn it. I think most kids would be
less inclined to do that if they didn't have to.
>
> : Would you drive your car on a bridge that was designed by a guy who
> : didn't check any of his calculations? I am a math major and have worked
> : with Maple, Mathmatica, the HP48, derive, TI calculators, and several
> : other packages over the years and have found each and every tool to fail
> : easily when you start throwing calculus at it. They are only tools and
> : should only be used if you have a sound knowledge of what is being done
> : and can do it yourself.
>
> The HP48 can only symbolically integrate the simplest of equations.
> Also, at least in my class, I am hardly ever asked to just plainly
> integrate an equation. Most of the time I am asked to find the volume of
> a revolved graph, SA of the same, etc, etc, etc... You won't be able to
> do the problem if you don't know what you're doing.
There are two distinct philosophies here. One says that knowing how to
solve a bigger problem is the most important, even if it is as easy as
simply picking the correct limits of integration and integrating a
canned expression or something similar. The other is the Feynman style
of it where mastering all the tools of solving the problem is most
important, albeit you may be useless with tons of book knowledge and no
practical knowledge. I think the second is far more important because I
have always found the first to be very easy and because when I run into
a problem that Maple can't deal with I wouldn't be able to solve it at
all without knowing lots of the intricate and obscure details of
calculus. For most people, if Maple can't do it, they certainly can't
do it either.
This is a religous argument, high school teachers know that most of
their students will never see calculus again after a few classes in
college, so they are more inclined to not stress the hardcore Feynman
style of it.
I can recall my hero Feynman solving problems that had befuddled teams
of scientists for months in minutes simply because he knew the details
of calculus.
> The HP48S/SX/G/GX are allowed on the Calculus AB/BC AP test. This in
> itself is proof that it isn't going to do anything for you if you don't
> know what you're doing.
It's proof that they are getting easier, just like SAT 2.0. Or at least
easier for some people. I guess some people may be more challenged by
the applications of the a few basic tools.
Ian S Nelson
T.. by Dave Arn...@cv.hp.com
> : should only be used if you have a sound knowledge of what is being done
> : and can do it yourself.
>
> I agree with the basis but not necessarily the implications.
>
> I think one of the worst tragedies is when someone uses a calculator to do
> numerical manipulations which the user does not comprehend. To use the
> machine to work deep and complex relationships amongst strings of functions
> when the user understands each individual portion of the string is great.
> Use a machine to deal with complexity. To let a calculator or computer to
> crunch large data sets, such as big matrices, is another good use, so long
> as the operator is using the machine to simplify the work, rather than as
> a substitute for understanding.
I agree 100% doing 1000 simple operations to multiply two matricies is a
perfect job for a computer. I'd probably jack it up and have to do it a
couple time by hand; it would take hours.
Understanding is definitely the most important part, but if all that is
needed to aid that process is a plot, then a TI would be more than
enough.
Getting through the drudgery is needed to go on to more complex issues,
but for the first couple years that drudgery is crucial. Honestly, I
picked up the overall concept of derivative and integral in a couple
days, if that. It's the function of the slope of the curve and the area
under it, the rate at which a function changes. It's not that tough to
comprehend, but it's very tough to capable to do tons of different
calculations using them.
My HP does so much stuff that it is a tool for doing work, but I don't
think it is a tool for learning in the beginning. (well maybe if you
took the User's Guide away) It simply does so much of what they are
learning. In highschool and the first couple years of college TI
dominates and I think that is the way it should be. When you get
through that, you pick up an HP and start working. Or HP should make a
more watered down version aimed at highschool kids.
Michael Lynn
an HP48. Everyone else either has a TI-81, TI-82, and TI-85. I don't
believe the choice of TI has anything to do with the abilities of certain
teachers. Our Calc teachers are extraordinarily fine instructors that
teach in a school for the gifted. They are not tied down to rules set by
any Board of Education about the use of any specific brand of
calculator. However, they mention the TI's in school (prefacing with a
"I'm neither for or against this calculator") because they have equipment
that will allow them to project onto a screen, with the TI button
template I believe, the screen of the TI-82. This makes the TI a
teaching calculator. I believe that HP made their calculators for
intense usage by the scientific community, not for teaching.
On top of all that, my Calc teacher supports RPN, believing it to be
much more logical and quicker than AOS.
--
***************************************************************************
Michael Lynn * ml...@dorsai.dorsai.org, @blackhole.infomatics.jax.org
New York City, NY * !!!!!!Proud Member of GUI and Team-NT!!!!!!
**** * "I've got good ... Bio-radiations."
TJL.SSP1994 * -- ChRoMoSoME '94
***************************************************************************
Harry J. Banaharis
> I would like to react in general on the opinions in this thread.
>
> First my position is that of an former TI-59(!) user which out grown it
> and went on to a HP-41CX. From then on only HP was considered as a
> potential new calculator.
>
>
> Twan van der Schoot
> Owner of a HP41CX, HP28C, HP48, HP48GX, TI-58(defect), and a TI-59 (still
> working fine).
This is of no major relevance to the TI vs HP topic going on here but I
just thought I would make mention and reminice the venerable HP41.
My first calculator was a Hanimex ESR1102 scientific with one of those
huge blue digits displays. This was then followed by a TI57C (my first
programmable). At the time (I was about 12) my friend and I began the
calulator race. He got himself a HP33 - now this calculator wasn't
programmable and I dont know what it was about this machine but it just
felt right when you used it, the way the digits looked with the commas
etc.. even so I thought I would stick with TI and I responded by getting a
TI58C and blew a couple of hundred dollars on program modules. He got a
HP67. Now that was intense. Again I felt that the TI was technologically
superior (it didnt read magnetic cards but the TI59 did and the 58C had
contant memory anyway) but I just liked the 'look and feel' of the HP.
Then something incredible happened. I remember taking my usual route
through the department store which carried these calculators (they had HP
and TI side by side) when I saw this incredible calculator. It was black
and wedge shaped with an alphanumeric LCD screen. It was incredibly
expandable and programmable. It was mine two weeks later (thats how long
it took to convince my mom of how badly I needed - science needed this
machine). The first night I couldn't sleep, I remember being able to
recite every word in the owners manual, I would carry it around wherever I
went until hormones finally kicked in.
Then the little 41 was usurped by my girlfriend. Since then I have gone
to 41CX, 28S, 48SX, 48GX (and all the appropriate Macs, a HP85, a 200LX,
three Newtons, a Sparcstation and an Indy). I have had the fortune to be
able to enjoy the various technologies but none have ever held the
excitement for me as that little 41C did.
Here's to synthetic programming..
(BTW something happened to TI after the 58C and 59, the 85 seems to me a
cheap imitation of a 48 - but it serves its purpose as I am sure many
student and teachers will attest. The next generation calc whether TI, HP
or whoever makes it should have no keyboard but a Newton-like screen
instead without the need for writing recognition. The keyboard should be
completely user definable.)
--
Harry J. Banaharis
bio...@ozonline.com.au
Maxwell Daymon
: "I'm neither for or against this calculator") because they have equipment
: template I believe, the screen of the TI-82. This makes the TI a
: teaching calculator. I believe that HP made their calculators for
: intense usage by the scientific community, not for teaching.
HP sells a special educational pack with:
(multiples of) 10 HP-48G calculators
1 Wallchart for calculator instruction
1 Projection based HP-48GX using a large matrix of
heat-insentive cells)
2 Advanced reference manuals (I think..)
They have some other educational stuff, but there IS a 48GX "calculator"
that is made for overhead projection.
Ram Naresh Gudavalli
: I'm a high schooler in Calc BC and I'm the ONLY one in my class with
: believe the choice of TI has anything to do with the abilities of certain
: teachers. Our Calc teachers are extraordinarily fine instructors that
I'm sure they are and my post wasn't intended to discredit high school
teachers.
: teach in a school for the gifted. They are not tied down to rules set by
: any Board of Education about the use of any specific brand of
: calculator. However, they mention the TI's in school (prefacing with a
: "I'm neither for or against this calculator") because they have equipment
: that will allow them to project onto a screen, with the TI button
: template I believe, the screen of the TI-82. This makes the TI a
: teaching calculator. I believe that HP made their calculators for
: intense usage by the scientific community, not for teaching.
There is a similar overhead projector for the HP. However, since the TI
is easier to use, it is more commonly used. Your last sentence is this
paragraph basically sums up my post.
Ram Gudavalli
ra...@xnet.com
Tim Mattison
My Pre-calculus teacher told me that he thought the HP made all his
Ti-82s look like simple four functions and THE ONLY reason the school
didn't get them is because they are trying to standardize the calculators
for all the classes and doing so with the HPs would cost much more since
they'd have to scrap all the TIs.
So, ha to all the "TIs are used in schools!" people. <g>
Dave Hicks
> As for reliability, I would bet that quite a few of them are
> still operational since their debut about 10 years ago. I would not say the
> same for TI.
I have two 20 year old HPs that are still doing fine. I've had no failures
in any of my 8 HPs.
Another nice thing about HPs is that RPN hasn't changed. For example 1+2/3=
yields different results on old TIs vs new ones. In fact, when you have to
use a calculator with an = key, the first thing you have to determine is
just how close to truely algebraic this machine is.
Vladimir Vukicevic
sr...@news-server.engin.umich.edu (stephen r mcgillivary) writes:
> As far as the 48 series goes, there are times that my > 48g seems too
> slow, the graphics and menu's tend to get in the way > when in a
> hurry. Which is why during a test you can always find a > 42s in my
> bag.
I -never- use the graphics and the scrolling menu crap on my
GX. Everything you can do through that you can do on the 6-label
menu. If this is the menu that you're referring to, I don't see why
it's so slow and why it gets in the way.. after all, if you know what
you're looking for, you can just type it in. (i.e. typing in "[1 2 3]
ABS" instead of doing "[1 2 3]" then hunting through the math vector
menu for the ABS key)
Plotting, eq solving, symbolic manipulation, etc. can all be accessed
through a much-faster interface by using purple-shift (key) instead of
green-shift. I can't remember the last time I plotted an equation from
the GUI interface.
- Vladimir
Vladimir Vukicevic
In article <3gk6r9$p...@news.halcyon.com> ama...@coho.halcyon.com
(Audin Malmin) writes:
> I personally like the HPs better than the TIs... mainly since HP
> seems to encourage programming on their machine. (going so far as to
> provide an assembler and low-level hardware info)... TI, on the other
> hand, seems to want to keep people from using their machine to the
> fullest. providing no way to easily program it in asm...even the OS
> seems to fight asm programs....(dynamicly moving things around in
> mem...)... (not that i'm saying they did this to prevent asm
> programming... just that they should have thought about the
> possability and tried to provide for it).
I hate to play devil's advocate, but the HP does this, too... garbage
collection. That's the reason why it's a pain to call SysRPL programs
from assembly... not to mention the braindeadedness in using only 5
nybbles of adressable space instead of going for 6 or so...
Oh well. I love my HP. :-)
- Vladimir
Jarno Peschier
>calculator. However, they mention the TI's in school (prefacing with a
>"I'm neither for or against this calculator") because they have equipment
>that will allow them to project onto a screen, with the TI button
>template I believe, the screen of the TI-82. This makes the TI a
>teaching calculator. I believe that HP made their calculators for
>intense usage by the scientific community, not for teaching.
But I thought you could get a set for the HP48GX (and SX?) to plug
into one of the expansion ports. This gives you an overhead screen
ability. I thought I saw this mentioned some day. It was expensive,
but possible.
> On top of all that, my Calc teacher supports RPN, believing it to be
>much more logical and quicker than AOS.
It is.. ;-)
JPSOFT
--
Jarno Peschier, jpes...@cs.ruu.nl, 125:3101/100.1@WEM, X:X8X/X1X.X@XiXo,
8X:X5X/X.X@XaXiXNXt, 27:2331/214.1@SigNet, 74:3108/102.1@QuaZie
___________________________________________________________________________
What was was, before was was was? Before was was was, was was is.
eric larson
> Dutch HBO or what you have) prefer and recommend a TI or TI-like
> calculator in lieu of a HP?
It's the same thing with PC's. Why do so many people buy and use Windows when
there are so many better alternatives?
The reason is marketing. TI (and Microsoft) have managed to pull the wool over
everyone's eyes.
EGON
over HP's and vice-versa. So what? If no one is forcing you to use one or
the other, what difference does it make?
This group has helped me tremendously as far as questions and programs, but
about once a month, someone has to get on their little soapbox and trash
someone else's ideas. Enough already- Live and Let Live!
Ok, I'm done now...
Jerami King
SophMechEngr.
Cedarville, OH
Sean Peisert
> cheap imitation of a 48 - but it serves its purpose as I am sure many
> student and teachers will attest. The next generation calc whether TI, HP
> or whoever makes it should have no keyboard but a Newton-like screen
> instead without the need for writing recognition. The keyboard should be
> completely user definable.)
With no RPN and with a easy programming language.
--
Sean Peisert
spei...@ucsd.edu
John King
They weren't cautious enough to do it from the start. People just assumed
that they were getting the correct answers. Question authority.
-jk
rwo...@primenet.com
Canon, of all companies was trying this very thing back in 1987-88 after the 28S
came out. It was basically an etch-a-sketch type tablet that you pen in your
equations, it converts the sketches a'la equation editor into expressions.
It was also supposed to do calculus as well, but as I later heard, they scrapped
it after some problems (presumably with the handwriting recognition).
It died with a whimper in 1987-88.
///////////////////----------------------------------------------------------
// Robert Worne // E-mail: rwo...@primenet.com
// -=Team OS/2=- // IP Address: 192.83.199.156
///////////////////----------------------------------------------------------
rwo...@primenet.com
>Can we let this argument die already? Obviously some are going to like Ti's
>over HP's and vice-versa. So what? If no one is forcing you to use one or
>the other, what difference does it make?
This is the point. At my school, there is a DEFINITE attempt to make students
purchase TI's over any other brand. In my calculus class, a TI-82 or TI-85 is
required (but I fly in the face of authority and am so far getting away with
it).
>This group has helped me tremendously as far as questions and programs, but
>about once a month, someone has to get on their little soapbox and trash
>someone else's ideas. Enough already- Live and Let Live!
>Ok, I'm done now...
Yes, I agree, I don't bash TI's except for the very things I had experience
with, mainly the shoddy construction techniques used in past models. I sold
them (along with HP's) and had to put up with the returns. HP calcs had an
extrememly low defective rate. In one year, the late 80's I sold dozens of 15's
, 16's, 28S's, 19's, and 27's, and hundreds of 12C's. The only defective return
I got was one 12C, and it had dead batteries. Several others, less than 10,
were returned because they were "too complicated."
TI's mostly came back after a few weeks with messed-up keyboards. Granted, the
TI's were cheaper than the HP's, but I recieved many, many returns on the TI's
due to shoddy parts and workmanship.
Killer
: In article <3gk6r9$p...@news.halcyon.com> (31 Jan 1995 02:21:29 GMT) Audin Malmin (ama...@coho.halcyon.com) wrote:
: : In article <3g8g2a$8...@tethys.otol.fi>,
: : Tuomas Haarala <tuo...@janus.otol.fi> wrote:
: : you to keep asm programs as normal files... exec. them is as easy as
: : exec. anything on a PC.
: What does it mean ? You CAN enter asm programs. No matter how they are
: put in (quite simple, indeed)
: : And you can't possably get any better than the HPs link setup. A simple
: : (standard except for the connector) serial cable. No extra ICs to deal
: : with. And the HP speaks both Kermit and Xmodem. Anyone with any
: : terminal software can speak to an HP.
: : I personally like the HPs better than the TIs... mainly since HP seems
: : to encourage programming on their machine. (going so far as to provide
: : an assembler and low-level hardware info)... TI, on the other hand,
: : seems to want to keep people from using their machine to the fullest.
: : providing no way to easily program it in asm...even the OS seems to fight
: : asm programs....(dynamicly moving things around in mem...)... (not that
: : i'm saying they did this to prevent asm programming... just that they
: : should have thought about the possability and tried to provide for it).
: If the HP is SO FAR better, why is there so few HP's in american schools
: or University ? (Something like 1-5%, according to a genuine HP owner).
: You really don't need all this power, do you ? Just to make stats or
: numeric calculus ?
The difference is that the HP is in many ways harder to use. Your
average, nonmathematical high school or college student wouldn't need an
HP; that 1-5% is a group primarily composed of those who need or want to
do more serious work in mathematics. I am a HS student who used a TI-85
happily until it met an unfortuante accident with a puddle and a rough
asphalt sidewalk...I replaced it with an HP48G, and I am sold. I plan on
majoring in physics, and am currently taking vector calc at Yale, so the
HP is for me _light-years_ ahead of any TI, althouh I'd recommend the TI
to the vast majority of my friends.
BTW, both the TI85 and HP48 do stats and numeric calculus; the HP has
better handling of units, symbolic capabilities, a great equation
library, and in general a more powerful command set...and, pain though it
may be to learn, the presence of RPN _without requiring the user to use
it_ gives the HP more speed and flexibility. Add XModem and Kermit, a
_much_ sturdier construction (see above accident with puddle and
sidewalk), and the ingenius directory system, and you have a much more
serious tool that has a place, not among all students (an average calc class
would probably be better served by TI-85s or -82s) but among
professionals, future professionals, and the mathematically and
compututationally inclined.
-Dave
Seth Arnold
>"I'm neither for or against this calculator") because they have equipment
>that will allow them to project onto a screen, with the TI button
>template I believe, the screen of the TI-82. This makes the TI a
>teaching calculator. I believe that HP made their calculators for
>intense usage by the scientific community, not for teaching.
Sure it can. One of my teachers last year (Who also taught calc) had an
overhead projector for the HP48. Of course, not iw only fits in the SX
type slot on the GX (slot one), and Jazz doesn't wanna work in port
two. (NO, fin, I am *not* asking you do it otherwise. I know why it
can't work. :-) Also, All my goodies are on a card in slot one. So, I
can't use it with my GX, but I could use it with an SX...
--
Seth Arnold | hid...@agora.rdrop.com | finger for pgp key
rwo...@primenet.com
> I'm a high schooler in Calc BC and I'm the ONLY one in my class with
Welcome to the club.
>an HP48. Everyone else either has a TI-81, TI-82, and TI-85. I don't
>believe the choice of TI has anything to do with the abilities of certain
>teachers. Our Calc teachers are extraordinarily fine instructors that
>teach in a school for the gifted. They are not tied down to rules set by
>any Board of Education about the use of any specific brand of
>calculator. However, they mention the TI's in school (prefacing with a
>"I'm neither for or against this calculator") because they have equipment
>that will allow them to project onto a screen, with the TI button
>template I believe, the screen of the TI-82. This makes the TI a
>teaching calculator. I believe that HP made their calculators for
My calc instructor has a TI-82 with the overhead projector kit, it IS a TI-82
that works as such, the availability of this kit is not the reason, since HP has
a similar setup for the 48 series. However, the HP setup is better, since the
overhead projector kit works on any 48 calculator, and the TI setup requires a
modified TI calculator. The costs of such by looking in my Educalc catalog does
put a real significant price difference between the two, $200 more for an HP
48GX setup vs. a TI-85.
>intense usage by the scientific community, not for teaching.
> On top of all that, my Calc teacher supports RPN, believing it to be
>much more logical and quicker than AOS.
On the contrary, the 48G(X) series is VERY handy to students, this is why they
are getting banned across the US.
(Could this be a TI conspiracy theory? Maybe this thread should be
cross-posted to alt.conspiracies, or create a new newsgroup
alt.conspiracies.ti-vs-hp )
Brad Battey
integrals, and many other such facts that help (almost too much). At my
HS, being one of at least five (and growing) HP48 series owners, the HP48
is considered a minor diety (ratio of 30 to 1 of TI-8? to HP48).
Killer (tru...@minerva.cis.yale.edu) wrote:
[delete, delete, delete, etc...]
: The difference is that the HP is in many ways harder to use. Your
: average, nonmathematical high school or college student wouldn't need an
: HP; that 1-5% is a group primarily composed of those who need or want to
: do more serious work in mathematics. I am a HS student who used a TI-85
: happily until it met an unfortuante accident with a puddle and a rough
: asphalt sidewalk...I replaced it with an HP48G, and I am sold. I plan on
: majoring in physics, and am currently taking vector calc at Yale, so the
: HP is for me _light-years_ ahead of any TI, althouh I'd recommend the TI
: to the vast majority of my friends.
: BTW, both the TI85 and HP48 do stats and numeric calculus; the HP has
: better handling of units, symbolic capabilities, a great equation
: library, and in general a more powerful command set...and, pain though it
: may be to learn, the presence of RPN _without requiring the user to use
: it_ gives the HP more speed and flexibility. Add XModem and Kermit, a
: _much_ sturdier construction (see above accident with puddle and
: sidewalk), and the ingenius directory system, and you have a much more
: serious tool that has a place, not among all students (an average calc class
: would probably be better served by TI-85s or -82s) but among
: professionals, future professionals, and the mathematically and
: compututationally inclined.
: -Dave
--
Later....
Br...@oeonline.com