HP Forum Archive 14

[ Return to Index | Top of Index ]

Different MEM number for newer 33s? Message #1 Posted by Paul Brogger on 3 May 2004, 8:52 p.m. I just got my second HP-33s (this time from Amazon). I copied all my vector manipulation programs from the first unit (yes, serial or robotic input would be nice!), verified all the lengths & checksums, and cleared the EQN lists. They seem to have identical weight. ;^) In response to MEM, the old one (ser. # CN 404nnnnnn) gives 30,556 (only the comma is MUCH smaller!) The new one (ser. # CNA412nnnnn) gives 30,542 . Is there a firmware change to account for this difference, or is there some other minor memory-grabber that I haven't dealt with yet? Of course, it doesn't make any difference. (If I was truly dedicated, I'd compare MEMs after paper-clip-resets, and type it all in twice more!) I'm just curious . . .

Re: Different MEM number for newer 33s? Message #2 Posted by bill platt (les Estats Unis d'Amerique) on 3 May 2004, 9:25 p.m., in response to message #1 by Paul Brogger Can you post your program listing? We'll try it here, too! Regards, Bill

Re: Different MEM number for newer 33s? Message #3 Posted by Paul Brogger on 4 May 2004, 2:32 p.m., in response to message #2 by bill platt (les Estats Unis d'Amerique) Well . . . I suppose I could -- that would mean actually documenting my programs . . . I'm not used to behaving like that, but I suppose I could try . . . ;^) But I don't think the programming is the issue. I claim to have entered the same code (as evidenced by identical lengths and checksums) into both calculators. The only other memory impactor that I know of is the EQN list -- and that's been cleared on both calculators. For good measure (even though I think they're pre-allocated) I've CLEARed VARS and Sigma. And yet, the memory is 14 bytes lower on the newer model. I heard somewhere that one of the bugs in the early units had been fixed in the later ones. (Does anyone know this for a fact?) If so, a difference in the firmware might account for a slight reduction in available RAM. (More likely: there's some memory-grabber that I don't know about and haven't cleared.) Surely, the thing to do is fully reset both calculators and then compare them, but I don't want to re-key the programs again. Perhaps those of you with one of the newer models could post your MEM number after a full reset? (I posted mine when I first got the original unit: 31,277 )

Re: Different MEM number for newer 33s? Message #4 Posted by Frank B. (Germany) on 4 May 2004, 4:31 p.m., in response to message #3 by Paul Brogger After a full reset: 31277 (serial# CNA411...) Frank.

Re: Different MEM number for newer 33s? Message #5 Posted by Matt Kernal (US) on 4 May 2004, 4:58 p.m., in response to message #3 by Paul Brogger After paper clip reset: 31257 After 3-fingered reset: 31277 (Same as yours and Franks) Serial #: CNA41001002 Matt

Re: Different MEM number for newer 33s? Message #6 Posted by Veli-Pekka Nousiainen on 6 May 2004, 5:43 a.m., in response to message #5 by Matt Kernal (US) 3 finger reset: MEM = 31277 Serial: CNA41105231 {VPN} AXL

Re: Different MEM number for newer 33s? Message #7 Posted by Brandon Del Bel on 4 May 2004, 5:11 p.m., in response to message #3 by Paul Brogger 31,277 CNA412...

Re: The memory mystery . . . Message #8 Posted by Paul Brogger on 4 May 2004, 7:11 p.m., in response to message #7 by Brandon Del Bel Everyone seems to be getting the same number, so I must have something somewhere in the newer unit that I don't in the old one. Were the older calculator to have the reduced memory, I'd suspect garbage collection, but it's the newer model with 14 fewer bytes. Again, it just don't mean nuttin', in the big picture. But it is curious.

Re: Different MEM number for newer 33s? Message #9 Posted by Jeff on 4 May 2004, 7:31 a.m., in response to message #1 by Paul Brogger Paul, Have you swapped the R/S and ENTER keys on either of your units yet? How about posting some pictures of a disassembled unit? (We all know you have disassembled one of them by now.)

Re: Different MEM number for newer 33s? Message #10 Posted by Paul Brogger on 4 May 2004, 2:26 p.m., in response to message #9 by Jeff I already posted pictures of my first unit: some and some more. No, I haven't swapped the keys. I'm not sure I'm going to. As nice as it would be if HP had done it "right", I have gotten used to the new positions. And, swapping the keys' functions would mean I'd have to mentally translate the function key actions each time I used LASTx, SHOW, PRGM & PSE. Maybe that would be easy, but I'm not sure it's worth it.

Re: Different MEM number for newer 33s? Message #11 Posted by Richard Garner on 4 May 2004, 3:55 p.m., in response to message #10 by Paul Brogger Not having a 33S or knowing how it uses memory. Could you have any numbers stored in memory or any numbers in the stack or flags that are set non-default? If the memory is used as a pool for all memory use, that could be throwing the totals off between the two.

Re: Different MEM number for newer 33s? Message #12 Posted by Veli-Pekka Nousiainen on 6 May 2004, 5:50 a.m., in response to message #11 by Richard Garner Filling the Stack and STOring values to all the registers does not change MEM from 31277 {VPN} AXL

Re: Different MEM number for newer 33s? Message #13 Posted by Neil on 4 May 2004, 5:24 p.m., in response to message #1 by Paul Brogger You mention the comma is much smaller on the older 33s. What about the decimal point? Is there a difference between the older and later versions?

Re: commas are the same Message #14 Posted by Paul Brogger on 4 May 2004, 6:55 p.m., in response to message #13 by Neil That was a lame joke. I meant the comma on the calculator display was much smaller than the one I typed into the Forum message . . . The displays look essentially identical -- maybe a bit less greenish and more bluish on the newer model, but that's probably my imagination. BTW, reducing the contrast does help with the shadowing -- so the decimal point & comma are the only serious drawbacks to the 33s, as far as I'm concerned.

Re: Different MEM number for newer 33s? Message #15 Posted by Ben Salinas on 4 May 2004, 7:42 p.m., in response to message #13 by Neil Here's another thing to try on the new one, to try and find the missing memory. Put your calculator into radians mode. Press C-y^x (to initiate the test), then press C-LN (to clear the test). What do you see on the screen (is the RAD annunciator on). Try 45 sin. Do you get .8509 or .7071? -Ben

Re: Different MEM number for newer 33s? Message #16 Posted by Frank B. (Germany) on 5 May 2004, 4:09 a.m., in response to message #15 by Ben Salinas My CNA411.... stays it RAD mode although the RAD annunciator is off. Regards, Frank.

Re: Different MEM number for newer 33s? Message #17 Posted by Fubar Vikinghelmet on 5 May 2004, 3:54 p.m., in response to message #1 by Paul Brogger Mine, serial number CNA41002*** shows 31,067.

Re: Different MEM number for newer 33s? Message #18 Posted by Fubar Vikinghelmet on 5 May 2004, 3:56 p.m., in response to message #17 by Fubar Vikinghelmet ...and after a complete reset it's 31,277.

[ Return to Index | Top of Index ]

Go back to the main exhibit hall