The Museum of HP Calculators

HP Forum Archive 14

 "New" 17BII+ L() and G() strange behaviourMessage #1 Posted by Vincent Weber on 16 Oct 2004, 3:02 p.m. Hi all, I finally managed to get one of these "new" 17BII+, supporting L() and G() functions. I tested this quickly in the shop, and I was so happy to see that L() and G() were back, that I think I was too quick to buy. If you enter the following equation in this 17BII+: L(A:2*X)+G(A)=B If you enter 5 for X, you get 10 (2*5) for B, whereas what you should get is 20 (2*5 + 2*5). My 17BII (not +) gives the correct result. So, I thought, Ok, well, the 17BII+ makes the L() function returns 0 instead of the value it assigns. Strange, but I may be able to live with it. But even stranger, consider the equation: L(A:2*X)=B This time the 17B++ gives the correct result for B when X=5, i.e. 2*5=10. So it seems that the L() function has the right behaviour, but that the G() function is not evaluated AFTER the L() function - hence, answers 0. I could verifying this by replacing G(A) with 3*G(A) in the first equation - still the same result (10 !). Is this ony me, or HP has really screwed up the implementation of L() and G(), and I wasted my money ? :( Cheers, Vincent

 Re: "New" 17BII+ L() and G() strange behaviourMessage #2 Posted by Bob Wang on 16 Oct 2004, 9:05 p.m.,in response to message #1 by Vincent Weber Vincent: Thanks for posting this behavior. May I ask you to enter the equation as: L(A:2*X)+G(A)- B = 0 And see if the behavior is the same. Thanks very much. Bob

 HP screwed up again - I'm done with them:(Message #3 Posted by Vincent Weber on 19 Oct 2004, 3:59 a.m.,in response to message #2 by Bob Wang I tried, and same results. Actually the results are arbitrary. Sometimes when you change the variable name and try again your get the correct result, most often not. As it you had 2 concurrent processes trying to evaluate L() and G(), when most often G() would win, and sometimes L(). This 17BII+ is a piece of crap, useless to business programmers, and HP never bothered to test it obviously. I am -done- with "new" HP calculators. Disgusted Vincent

 Re: HP screwed up again - I'm done with them:(Message #4 Posted by mark on 19 Oct 2004, 9:32 a.m.,in response to message #3 by Vincent Weber I also Tried this on a New hp 17Bii+ (bought in the UK) and an old hp17Bii. I can confirm the same behaviour, the New hp17Bii+ doesnt solve the equation in the same way as the old HP 17Bii.

 Re: HP screwed up again - I'm done with them:(Message #5 Posted by Bobby Wang on 19 Oct 2004, 10:13 a.m.,in response to message #4 by mark Vincent and Mark: Thanks very much for testing the new 17BII+. Before you give up, maybe one of the gurus can compile a bug list, and workarounds to make these units "reliable". Once I get my replacement unit, I'll try to pin down some of the quirks. It is a shame that the Solver implementation leaves so much to be desired. Bob

 Re: HP screwed up again - I'm done with them:(Message #6 Posted by George on 20 Oct 2004, 12:00 a.m.,in response to message #5 by Bobby Wang I got my 17bii+ exchanged with serial CNA416xxxxx in Hong Kong two weeks ago. Following the equation from Vincent, I got 20 and 10 respectively. The result for Bob's suggestion is 20. It seems okay for my calculator.

 Very strangeMessage #7 Posted by Bob Wang on 20 Oct 2004, 11:55 a.m.,in response to message #6 by George George: Thanks for posting your results. I can't wait to get my unit replaced so I can check out this behavior. Bob

 Be sure to send your discovereies to HPMessage #8 Posted by bill platt on 19 Oct 2004, 10:41 a.m.,in response to message #1 by Vincent Weber I sent in a comprehensive Bug List to HP regarding the 33s, and they "escalated" my claim..... We'll see what happens. I suspect that unless we speak up, nothing will happen--but that if we do, we may actually move them! It is thoroughly frustrating, though! Regards, Bill

 Re: Be sure to send your discovereies to HPMessage #9 Posted by Mike H on 19 Oct 2004, 1:31 p.m.,in response to message #8 by bill platt I recently (last week) sent my 49G+ back to HP for exchange... keyboard issues. While I had tech support on the phone, I ask if they were aware of any changes/updates for the 33s. Her response was "not officially". I then ask if unofficially she was aware of any updates to the bugs on the 33s. She responded that they have only been informed of the "swap bug" between older Wal-Mart versions and the newer version. They have not “officially” been informed of any other problems with the 33S!!!

 Re: Be sure to send your discovereies to HPMessage #10 Posted by bill platt on 19 Oct 2004, 2:38 p.m.,in response to message #9 by Mike H Hi Mike, I think it is a case of the tech support people not being kept in the loop. Also, interesting to hear the swap as a "bug" as the swap feature is not documented at all in the manual, anyway. And, in fact, depending on your preference, both the 1st Walmart release (has an algebraic swap operationally identical to the 20s0 and the later release (has a dual calculator algebraic line) have their advantages and disadvantages. Interestingly, Włodek's training aid, avaialable on the HP website, only acknowledges the early swap version (see the file with the filename "...33sRPN.pdf"---see the bottom of page 9. Yet, I would imagine that most of the 33s macines out there are the newer release (they have an "A" in the serial number.)

 17BII+ S/N CN4130 gives right answerMessage #11 Posted by Gene on 25 Oct 2004, 10:43 a.m.,in response to message #1 by Vincent Weber Try this: A = L(D:B+C) + G(D) Put in 5 for B and 5 for C and then solve for A. A is returned as 20, which is correct. Trying the L(A:2*X)+G(A)=B equation above, I get the correct answer. What S/N are the machines not giving the correct answers? Gene

 I am done with KinHPo - Valentin was rightMessage #12 Posted by Vincent Weber on 25 Oct 2004, 11:30 a.m.,in response to message #11 by Gene Hi Gene, I don't know, and I don't care anymore. I am *done* with them and their crap. I have bought two 17BII+, none of which is able to solve a simple equation with L() and G() properly, and none of which being nicely made (the painting is fading away, the keyboard is cheap). I don't want to have anything to do with them anymore. Good luck to those who still have hopes. I initially thought that Valentin was too harsh, but now I think he was quite moderate in his comments on "New HP". Cheers, Vincent

 "AND ANOTHER UN-SATISFIED CUSTOMER!!!" enuff said Message #13 Posted by Ron Ross on 25 Oct 2004, 12:00 p.m.,in response to message #12 by Vincent Weber Hp, ARE YOU LISTENING??? And the 17Bii+ is actually the best pocket calculator available as it can use the 32K that it comes with vs the Hp33s cannot.

 S/N CNA416 - Strange BehaviourMessage #14 Posted by George on 26 Oct 2004, 11:18 p.m.,in response to message #13 by Ron Ross Results of my S/N CNA416 replacement: L(A:2*X)+G(A)=B input X=5 and solve for B=20 L(A:2*X)+G(A)-B=0 input X=5 and solve for B=20 So far so good, BUT A=L(D:B+C)+G(D) input B=5 and C=5 and solve for A=10 !!! The inconsistancy is driving me crazy. I am wondering how long it will take HP to make any correction and whether they will still do the exchange when my warranty period lapsed already!

Go back to the main exhibit hall