|Re: Long Live the HP-42S !|
Message #23 Posted by Valentin Albillo on 18 Jan 2005, 10:01 a.m.,
in response to message #22 by Tony Duell
Tony posted: "I have a perfect excuse for not trying it. I am not going to type in over 1000 lines of program for a problem I am not particularly interested in."
The excuse may be perfect but the counting is not: my program is 423 lines long, not "over 1000 lines".
"And I don't have anything to run those emulators on."
That means you don't have any kind of PC (to run Emu42) and you also have no HP-48GX, HP-48SX, HP-49G, HP-49G+ (for HP-42X). I find it very hard to believe, but assuming that's possible, you'll concede such is not exactly frequent among HP fans, specially those contributing to this forum or enjoying an HPCC membership like you do, both.
"I've said this before, but I regard the HP42S as one of the worst mistakes HP ever made."
Let's see ...
"take out the good bits (extended functions, I/O, synthetic programming, time module, etc, etc), put in the Advantage Pac (which of all the modules I own is the
one I use least). There's no way of backing up the 42S memory to anything else (unlike the 41, where you can use cards, tapes, floppy disks, or another computer system)"
Comparing calculators meant for different niche markets is like comparing apples and oranges. The HP42S was originally intended as a successor and replacement for the HP-41C, then
as the same but for the HP-15C instead, which was its
redefinition. As such, comparing it to the HP-41C is like comparing the HP-15C vs. the HP-41C: can be done, can be fun, but it's meaningless ultimately.
Nevertheless, let's engage in some 'comparisons'. You've stated at leisure the 'good bits' taken, but of course, you concede no 'good bits' added or even acknowledge that it might have some. I'll try and fill up that void in your argument:
- Less bulky, quite comfortable slim design.
- More robust, less prone to hardware failures (corrosion, anyone ? discrete components failures ?).
- Better, more modern low-power electronics, with much larger useful battery life.
- Wider, 2-line x 22-character dot matrix display with user-accessible variable contrast.
- Simple but useful graphics capabilities.
- Over 7 Kb of usable RAM, easily expandable to 32 Kb.
- Much faster program execution.
- Greater precision, 12-digit mantissa plus exponents up to +-499, internally extended to 15-digit.
- Much enhanced, classic RPN 'keystroke language', including menus, named variables, graphic commands, the works.
- Much larger Alpha register, up to 44 characters long.
- Incredibly expanded math functionality, with full matrix operations, full handling of complex numbers, solve and integrate, boolean operations, base conversions and arithmetic, all working at full assembler speeds and with extended, 15-digit precision.
- All new objects (complex numbers, matrices) are seamlessly integrated with classic RPN, and can be stored in a single stack level or named variable, plus most mathematical functions act upon them transparently to the user, so that you can attempt to take the sine of a complex number or a matrix and the function will work and produce a useful result.
- Ergonomic features, such as the program, variables and functions catalogues, with menus and submenus.
And I could go on and on and on. But, being a highly intelligent individual, you yourself could easily come up with such a list if you were to try, so if you haven't it's just because you're sacrificing your objectivity for reasons only known to you,
which can hardly pass for rational arguments.
"I really can't see the atraction of the 42S over the 41."
I know. And you'll probably never will. But that's your prerogative, "Ye pay yer money, ye take yer choices" and I'm not the one to discuss them. You don't like the 42S ? Good for you.
Best regards from V.
Edited: 18 Jan 2005, 11:09 a.m.