|Re: A(nother) Little Gem|
Message #4 Posted by Walter B on 23 Aug 2006, 2:34 a.m.,
in response to message #1 by Mike T.
you're right! I had the same feelings when I worked with my 25C since 1977. It was a perfect handheld at this time for me (another young physicist then - hi Larry :) ). Everything I really needed in a cute, neat, powerful, rugged, reliable, small package.
The only feature I missed was linear regression. It was almost permanently residing in my program memory but consumed nearly all of its 49 steps, so I changed to a 11C in 1982.
Form-factor-wise, I still *love* the Woodstock design. Next to perfection for the functionality it contains! For today, however, "only" 30 keys and the small display space are very hard constraints. While one may make good use of the keys (at least it may be worth a try, though I guess it will be a hard one), IMO the display area *must* be expanded to meet today's requirements and expectations.
Nevertheless, a LCD-equipped Woodstock may still be the best choice for scientificly simple, "quick & dirty" calculations on the fly. AFAIK, Eric Smith works on such a machine.
For the time being, enjoy!