The Museum of HP Calculators

HP Forum Archive 15

[ Return to Index | Top of Index ]

Culling my collectiion and going with a 48gx model
Message #1 Posted by Joe Edwards on 5 Feb 2006, 6:10 p.m.

Okay, I think it is in my best interest to leave the collecting to the professionals. :) So here I am with several calculators I plan on selling. I am thinking that I should stick with my 27s (and get a 48gx. The emulators of the 10 series, 41 series, and 42s that Hrastprogrammer seem to be of high quality, plus I could just carry them all in one, albiet, large machine.

Since I am not true collector I don't need many machines, do you folks think I am making a mistake? Just a thought.

Would I be better off in the long run just getting a 33s and a 49g+? Sad thought, but this may be the best choice.

Edited: 5 Feb 2006, 6:17 p.m.

      
Re: Culling my collectiion and going with a 48gx model
Message #2 Posted by Namir on 5 Feb 2006, 8:12 p.m.,
in response to message #1 by Joe Edwards

I think you should send all your collection to me ... to compensate me for thinkig for you!

Edited: 5 Feb 2006, 8:13 p.m.

      
Re: Culling my collectiion and going with a 48gx model
Message #3 Posted by Howard Owen on 5 Feb 2006, 8:52 p.m.,
in response to message #1 by Joe Edwards

Quote:
Would I be better off in the long run just getting a 33s and a 49g+? Sad thought, but this may be the best choice.

There are only two reasons I can see for going with older machines. First, the older calculators are generally built better. The 49G+ has issues with keys breaking and labels wearing off with use. I haven't heard any bad reports about the 33S as far as durability goes, but some people just can't stand the weird chevron shape and the bugs. (Most, but not all bugs have been worked out as of the most recent version of the 33S.) The second reason would be affection/enthusiasm for the old machines. That's certainly why I own old HP machines, although the durability is part of the reason I have that affection.

Balancing that are several factors. Both the 49G+ and 33S run a good deal faster than the machines they replaced. They both have more features, too. Both have bigger displays. On the 49G+, the display improvement is huge, when compared to the 49G, and large when stacked aainst the 48G. If you need one or another of these improvements in your work with the calculators, that will of course weigh more heavily.

Hrast's emulators can run on the 49G+, but frequently with less functionality than on the 48GX. Hrast still identifies the 48GX as the best platform to run his emulators on. You will be unable to run any two of the emulators at the same time, however, or have them installed side-by-side. If you have a large RAM card in port 2, you can store the ones you aren't using there, and switch them in and out as you wish. (Hrast will surely correct me if I don't have that exactly right. Perhaps there are some combinations you can run on the 48GX.) I'm planning to write a program to do the switching on my own main 48GX, with a 4MB RAM card in port 2.

Good luck with your decision!

Regards
Howard

            
Re: Culling my collectiion and going with a 48gx model
Message #4 Posted by Massimo Gnerucci (Italy) on 5 Feb 2006, 10:44 p.m.,
in response to message #3 by Howard Owen

Quote:
You will be unable to run any two of the emulators at the same time, however, or have them installed side-by-side

1. True
2. False: I, for one, have all of them installed on a GX: 41X, 42X, 71X, 11E, 12E, 15E and 16E.

Greetings,
Massimo

                  
Re: Culling my collectiion and going with a 48gx model
Message #5 Posted by Howard Owen on 5 Feb 2006, 11:19 p.m.,
in response to message #4 by Massimo Gnerucci (Italy)

Don't they compete for room in port 1?

If you swap them in and out of port 1, that's what I meant by saying they could be stored in a RAM card in port 2. But they aren't "installed" there, since you can't run them out of port 2+, can you?

Regards,
Howard.

                        
Re: Culling my collectiion and going with a 48gx model
Message #6 Posted by HrastProgrammer on 6 Feb 2006, 1:08 a.m.,
in response to message #5 by Howard Owen

Howard,

You must read instructions on my pages more carefully :-)

Of course, you can execute all my emulators directly from any port 1..33 without problem on HP-48GX. It is not possible to run them directly from Port2 on HP-49G/G+.

For example, on my own HP-48GX they are installed as follows:

Home: XQ42, XQ71 and XM41 (when needed for HP-41X)
Port 0: XF71 or XR71 (when needed for HP-71X)
Port 1: XM42 for HP-42X or XM71 for HP-71X
Port 2: RAM48X for HP-41X
Port 3: RAM48X for HP-42X (or for HP-71X without XF71/XR71)
Port 4: RAM48X for HP-71X with XF71
Port 5: RAM48X for HP-71X with XR71
Port 6: HP41X
Port 7: HP42X
Port 8: HP71X
Port 9: HP41Z
Port10: XM42
Port11: XM71
Port12: Backup of HP41X (original, disabled with BAK2)
Port13: Backup of HP42X (original)
Port14: Backup of HP71X (original), HPILROM.CRD
Port15: Backup of HP41Z (original, disabled with BAK2)
Port16: HP11E, HP12E, HP15E and HP16E
Port17: Free

Forget about RAM48X and BAK2 for a moment - these are my personal utilities.

This is from HP41X/install.htm:

HP-48GX installation:

The emulator can be executed from Port1 or from a covered port (2..33). In order to use the emulator, you must have at least one 128K (writeable) RAM card in Port1. Before installation, make shure that Port0 and Port1 are empty. If needed, initialize them with PINIT and clear everything from them. Then, use MERGE1 to merge Port1 with the main memory. This is necessary because the size of some librares is nearly 128K. If you want to use HP41Z library (and have second >=128K RAM card) then it must be received from the computer now. Store it to some covered port because there isn't much sense of storing it to Port1 (covered port must be empty, of course). Press ON+C to reboot the calculator. If you don't want to use it or you doesn't have any (free) covered ports then simply skip previous three steps. After doing this, receive the HP41X library from the computer. If you want to install the emulator to Port1 then execute the following instructions: 0 STO { :0: 1052 } FREE1.

If you want to install it to a covered port then simply store it to that port (port must be empty before storing) with something like 2 STO and free Port1 with {} FREE1. It is very important to free Port1 because emulator will not start if Port1 remains merged ('Port Not Available' error will be generated). Press ON+C to (automatically) attach the HP41X library to the HOME directory and the emulator is ready to be started with XQ41 library command.

Best regards.

      
Re: Culling my collectiion and going with a 48gx model
Message #7 Posted by John Limpert on 5 Feb 2006, 9:01 p.m.,
in response to message #1 by Joe Edwards

For day to day use, I'd stick with the HP-48GX. Newer models may be faster and have more features, but the HP-48GX was the last model with a good keyboard, sensible layout of keyboard functions, and a color scheme that doesn't hurt my eyes.

      
Re: Culling my collectiion and going with a 48gx model
Message #8 Posted by Stephen Easterling on 5 Feb 2006, 10:38 p.m.,
in response to message #1 by Joe Edwards

I remember being where you are now and asking the exact same question. To answer it, I have 30 different HP models now. I do have the 49G+ and two 33S calcs (one for work and one for the collection). In the beginning, all I wanted to want (I hope that sounds right) was the 33S and 49G+. However, due to a slight lack of patience with both models for several reasons (all posted on this forum by many users), I decided to try some of the older models. (My first was a 28S over 15 yrs ago.) I fell in love with the older ones for their quality (no keyboard problems that I've experienced with the 33S, 49G+, 12C Platinum, and 17BII+) and overall feel and aesthetics. I learned that I actually prefer the 12C or 11C/15C (Voyager series) as a day-to-day scientific calc despite their relatively slow speed compared to todays newer calcs. I will say, though, that after downloading the new ROM 2.00 into my 49G+, I have not had any problems with its keypad at all. However, I do find it a bit clumsy to use for quick scientific calculations.

      
Re: Culling my collectiion and going with a 48gx model
Message #9 Posted by Les Bell on 5 Feb 2006, 10:57 p.m.,
in response to message #1 by Joe Edwards

I'm not a collector, but I certainly couldn't get by with just a 48 or 49. The 41 is much more convenient for back-of-an-envelope stuff, and the 16C is the only way to go for computer-related work.

The 48 is just too cumbersome for daily use, imho. I only use it for maths self-study.

Best,

--- Les
[http://www.lesbell.com.au]

            
Re: Culling my collectiion and going with a 48gx model
Message #10 Posted by Thomas Okken on 6 Feb 2006, 1:38 a.m.,
in response to message #9 by Les Bell

Hi Les,

Not to contradict you or anything (I love the 41 and 16C too, and I agree that the 48 tends to be a bit too awkward for quick-and-dirty work)... But what do you think about the 42S? If you can live without the 41's expandability, and without the 16C's variable word size, the 42S seems like the best of both worlds.
Just $0.02 from a majorly biased person. ;-)

- Thomas

                  
Re: Culling my collectiion and going with a 48gx model
Message #11 Posted by Les Bell on 6 Feb 2006, 3:26 a.m.,
in response to message #10 by Thomas Okken

I'll go along with that, Thomas; I like the 41 because I have a couple with lots of modules, card reader and printer, but the 42S would suit me about as well (I rarely use the printer and have never got around to fixing my card reader - assuming that it *has* a gummy wheel problem, which it certainly ought to).

But the 16C is a bit harder to replace - it's nice having fast keyboard access to all those logical, rotate and bit count functions. . .

Best,

--- Les
[http://www.lesbell.com.au]

      
Collecting, or just having several calc's?
Message #12 Posted by Karl Schneider on 6 Feb 2006, 1:33 a.m.,
in response to message #1 by Joe Edwards

Quote:
Okay, I think it is in my best interest to leave the collecting to the professionals. :) So here I am with several calculators I plan on selling. I am thinking that I should stick with my 27s (and get a 48gx....

Since I am not true collector I don't need many machines, do you folks think I am making a mistake? Just a thought.


Hello, Joe --

I coveted the HP-41C/CV in 1980-81, but it was too pricey for me at the time. In late 1981 or 1982, I saw an LED-display HP-34C. When I had some money in late 1983, I set out to buy a HP-34C, but the salesman steered me to buy something better: the HP-15C. It served me through three degree programs.

In 2002, I vistited a local used-electronics seller, who had a 34C and several 41's in a drawer. I saw an opportunity to obtain what I had to pass up 20 years prior, and ended up buying the 34C and a near-mint 41CV from the store.

I didn't set out to become a collector, but in the MoHPC Forum, I learned about the fine HP-42S, HP-16C, and other models. I eventually bought these and others on eBay and from the local seller. My collection now includes the LED-based HP-35 and HP-34C, plus all five Voyager-series models, all 11 Pioneer-series models, all three HP-41 models, as well as the HP-71B, HP-48G, and HP-28C.

My focus in collecting has been to keep and preserve the examples from what I consider HP's 1979-1993 "golden era" of calculators: affordable, well-engineered, well-built, and well-documented.

Sure, there were other fine HP calculators from outside that era (e.g., HP-67), and there were others from that era (e.g., HP-75, HP-18C). However, limits should be imposed...

Would it be worth it you in time and money to be one of those who help preserve part of the legacy of an American company, which once was run by engineers and did things right? Only you can answer appropriately for your own situation. A "complete" collection will cost you thousands of dollars at eBay prices.

If you would want to limit such a collection to the creme de la creme of HP calculators from that era, I'd recommend the following:

Foundation: HP-15C, HP-41CX, HP-32SII, HP-17BII (or HP-27S)
Supplemental:  HP-16C, HP-42S, HP-28C/S, HP-71B, HP-48

Of these, however, only the financial HP-17BII and RPL-based HP-28C/S can usually be had for less than $100.

  • The HP-15C surpasses the HP-10C and HP-11C.
  • The HP-41CX surpasses the HP-41C and HP-41CV.
  • The HP-32SII surpasses the HP-32S.
  • The HP-17BII surpasses the HP-17B, providing RPN.
  • The HP-27S provides the fine equation solver and time/calendar functions of the HP-17BII, but not all the financial functions.
  • The HP-16C is a unique computer-science model.
  • The HP-42S is the most capable RPN, but is somewhat awkward and limited in certain ways.
  • The HP-28C/S offer a nice unit library with conversions.
  • The HP-71B is significant, but quite different from calculators.
  • The HP-48 (certain models?) will allow you to run the emulators.

I don't yet have the fine emulators that HrastProgrammer, Eric Smith and others have graciously provided to us. Even though the emulators outperform the "real McCoy" physical calculators, I prefer the tactile "actuality" of the original hardware.

Regards,

-- KS

      
Re: Culling my collectiion and going with a 48gx model
Message #13 Posted by Geir Isene on 6 Feb 2006, 3:28 a.m.,
in response to message #1 by Joe Edwards

There are of course pros and cons for most every machine. My highlights are as follows:

48GX: A solid math and graphing machine. Big and not a very good programming environment. The clock /drifts/.
42S: A very good calculator. Small and full of features. Lacks I/O to save programs.
41CX: A very good calculator with great I/O. Slow and a bit bulky but with a very good programming environment (IMHO).
Voyagers: Very good LCD, small and well built. No alphanumerics. Slow and maybe horizontal layout is something to get used to.
97: Great calc for your desktop. One shift key. Easy access to all functions. Ok, it's slow, but it's pretty.
67: Good calc for us hobby astronomers with its red LED display.
(I don't have a 49g+ or a 33s.)

Just my 2 Ýre.

      
Re: Culling my collectiion and going with a 48gx model
Message #14 Posted by Joe Edwards on 6 Feb 2006, 8:56 a.m.,
in response to message #1 by Joe Edwards

So far I have decided to keep the following:

HP 33s returned to Fry's. Going to skip buying a 49g+.

I have decided to stick with the following models: HP 21 as a desktop four-banger. The LED's were too much to pass up. HP 27s as my favorite of all HPs. HP 48gx with 41, 42, 16, and 15 emulators.

I thought about going the "Made in USA" route only. This would be the following: HP 21 HP 11c HP 15c HP 16c (maybe a 12c and 10c later on) HP 41c

It seems that the 27s, 42s, and 48 models are all made in Singapore. My 41c is US made, but my 41cx is Singapore made. Are there any CV and CX models made in the USA?

Thanks for the input. Joe

Edited: 6 Feb 2006, 12:05 p.m.

            
Re: Culling my collectiion and going with a 48gx model
Message #15 Posted by Ed Look on 7 Feb 2006, 11:57 a.m.,
in response to message #14 by Joe Edwards

Awww, maybe I should have responded sooner.

I truly have found the 33S to be quite useful and handy; it is a slightly expanded version of the 32SII.

In research activities, I find I need a combination of a calc from group 1 [49G+ or 48(G or G+)], and one from group 2 [32SII or 33S]. While I truly enjoy the feel of using the 32SII, I must confess the 33S is a tad bit more USEFUL with the slightly more spacious programming capacity and speed and preprogrammed constants library. Other times, I need my self-stored data or programs I put on the graphing ones from group 1; not that I ever graph any functions, I just need their programmability and memory.

If I teach advanced courses, I often need one of the group 1 machines because I've written and stored programs on it and if an intro course, I use it as a very portable "MS Excel" for quick stats.

In either case, the "smaller" calculators in group 2 are needed actually more often for, as we all call them, quick and dirty, or even somewhat more involved calculations that might require just light programming.

The vintage calcs are sweet and I myself only own one (not totally functional anymore), but these newer and much more maligned HP units are actually more than useful; they are quite handy.

(They really aren't a bad first couple of steps in trying to stake a claim on the calculator market again!)

                  
Re: Culling my collectiion and going with a 48gx model
Message #16 Posted by Joe Edwards on 7 Feb 2006, 6:08 p.m.,
in response to message #15 by Ed Look

Ed, The 33s wasn't bad. It seems to me to be a nice zombie mutation of the HP 22s and the HP32sii. Unfortunetly, I don't like the cluttered keyboard of the 32sii anymore than the 33s. I would rather stick with the 32s by itself versus the 33s, given the choice.

Quote:
Awww, maybe I should have responded sooner.

I truly have found the 33S to be quite useful and handy; it is a slightly expanded version of the 32SII.

In research activities, I find I need a combination of a calc from group 1 [49G+ or 48(G or G+)], and one from group 2 [32SII or 33S]. While I truly enjoy the feel of using the 32SII, I must confess the 33S is a tad bit more USEFUL with the slightly more spacious programming capacity and speed and preprogrammed constants library. Other times, I need my self-stored data or programs I put on the graphing ones from group 1; not that I ever graph any functions, I just need their programmability and memory.

If I teach advanced courses, I often need one of the group 1 machines because I've written and stored programs on it and if an intro course, I use it as a very portable "MS Excel" for quick stats.

In either case, the "smaller" calculators in group 2 are needed actually more often for, as we all call them, quick and dirty, or even somewhat more involved calculations that might require just light programming.

The vintage calcs are sweet and I myself only own one (not totally functional anymore), but these newer and much more maligned HP units are actually more than useful; they are quite handy.

(They really aren't a bad first couple of steps in trying to stake a claim on the calculator market again!)


                        
Re: Culling my collectiion and going with a 48gx model
Message #17 Posted by Ed Look on 7 Feb 2006, 11:21 p.m.,
in response to message #16 by Joe Edwards

LOL!!

Quote:
... 33s... a nice zombie mutation of the HP 22s and the HP32sii...


[ Return to Index | Top of Index ]

Go back to the main exhibit hall