The Museum of HP Calculators

HP Forum Archive 19

[ Return to Index | Top of Index ]

Very OT, but calculator anyway
Message #1 Posted by Johnny Bjoern Rasmussen on 22 Oct 2009, 4:24 p.m.

Not HP nor RPN, but a little interesting anyway. A very strange looking calculator: KYD-2811

Cheers!

Johnny

      
Re: Very OT, but calculator anyway
Message #2 Posted by Don Shepherd on 22 Oct 2009, 4:27 p.m.,
in response to message #1 by Johnny Bjoern Rasmussen

Kinda looks like an electronic abacus!

      
(edited: wrong link) Very OT, but calculator anyway
Message #3 Posted by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil) on 22 Oct 2009, 4:32 p.m.,
in response to message #1 by Johnny Bjoern Rasmussen

Hi;

I tried further research and found this link. Seems to me some people are trying news ways to do old tricks...

Cheers.

Luiz (Brazil)

Edited: 22 Oct 2009, 4:37 p.m.

            
Re: (edited: wrong link) Very OT, but calculator anyway
Message #4 Posted by Don Shepherd on 22 Oct 2009, 5:18 p.m.,
in response to message #3 by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil)

Quote:
some people are trying news ways to do old tricks

That may be, but they're going to have to explain things a lot better than this link currently does. I have no ideal what the point of this calculator is. Where are the number keys?

                  
Re: (edited: wrong link) Very OT, but calculator anyway
Message #5 Posted by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil) on 22 Oct 2009, 5:36 p.m.,
in response to message #4 by Don Shepherd

Hi, Don;

I also tried to find this answers out, but nope! Found nothing but these pages. And you see, it is priced 0.00 (consult vendor, I guess), no PDF available... If it is like an Abacus, then the 'lever-like' middle keys may be the answer: numbers are probably entered in a abacus-fashion... <]8^O

Cheers.

Luiz (Brazil)

Edited: 22 Oct 2009, 5:37 p.m.

                        
Re: (edited: wrong link) Very OT, but calculator anyway
Message #6 Posted by Don Shepherd on 22 Oct 2009, 5:41 p.m.,
in response to message #5 by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil)

Hey, here's a thought, it's a brand new system from HP. None of the keys are labelled, so you program it yourself and define your own keys. Just what we have wanted for years!!

: )

Don

                  
Re: (edited: wrong link) Very OT, but calculator anyway
Message #7 Posted by Paul Brogger on 22 Oct 2009, 6:51 p.m.,
in response to message #4 by Don Shepherd

I think "electronic abacus" is correct.

I don't see how it's even "1 times faster" than a regular calculator, let alone 8x. (An abacus can certainly be faster than pencil & paper, but faster than the typical modern calculator?)

But I'd like to play with one.

Edited: 22 Oct 2009, 6:53 p.m.

                        
Re: (edited: wrong link) Very OT, but calculator anyway
Message #8 Posted by Michael Meyer on 22 Oct 2009, 7:59 p.m.,
in response to message #7 by Paul Brogger

Definitely different than anything I've ever seen. Thanks!! If anyone finds out how to get one, let us know. I like calculators that are "different".

                        
Re: (edited: wrong link) Very OT, but calculator anyway
Message #9 Posted by Bart (UK) on 23 Oct 2009, 5:19 a.m.,
in response to message #7 by Paul Brogger

Quote:
(An abacus can certainly be faster than pencil & paper, but faster than the typical modern calculator?)
It seems the abacus may be faster - for addition and subtraction anyway. Link
                              
Re: (edited: wrong link) Very OT, but calculator anyway
Message #10 Posted by Michael Plant on 23 Oct 2009, 6:01 p.m.,
in response to message #9 by Bart (UK)

Surely computers and calculators have come a long way WRT speed since 1946!

EDIT: Oh bother! Scratch the above - I need to learn to read! Of course an abacus is faster than pencil and paper. I misread the previous post and thought the argument was that an abacus is faster than a computer. Doh!

Edited: 23 Oct 2009, 6:03 p.m.

                                    
Re: (edited: wrong link) Very OT, but calculator anyway
Message #11 Posted by Bart (UK) on 24 Oct 2009, 4:15 a.m.,
in response to message #10 by Michael Plant

Hi,

Actually my focus was on:

Quote:
undocumented tests still show that an expert can add and subtract faster on an abacus than someone using an electronic calculator
and I did say "it seems"

.... just to plant that seed of doubt on the perceived superiority of modern technology... ;)
                  
Re: (edited: wrong link) Very OT, but calculator anyway
Message #12 Posted by Allen on 22 Oct 2009, 8:24 p.m.,
in response to message #4 by Don Shepherd

Don, The top "10-key" keypad on this one contains a translation of the characters on the top row of the electronic abacus.

                        
Re: (edited: wrong link) Very OT, but calculator anyway
Message #13 Posted by Don Shepherd on 22 Oct 2009, 9:02 p.m.,
in response to message #12 by Allen

I wonder what all that 0x1 0x2 0x3 stuff means? I don't think I'm going to spend time with this calc.

                              
Re: (edited: wrong link) Very OT, but calculator anyway
Message #14 Posted by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil) on 22 Oct 2009, 9:20 p.m.,
in response to message #13 by Don Shepherd

Hi, Don;

they are "zero character times 1, 2 or 3". [0x2], for instance, adds 2 zeroes to the number in the display.

2 [0x2] = 200 (Wow! Same as using [EEX][2])

New ways to do old tricks, I'd say...

Cheers.

Luiz (Brazil)

Edited: 22 Oct 2009, 9:22 p.m.

                                    
Re: (edited: wrong link) Very OT, but calculator anyway
Message #15 Posted by Don Shepherd on 22 Oct 2009, 10:00 p.m.,
in response to message #14 by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil)

OK, that makes sense. How many times would you need a key devoted to 9 zeroes, though?

                                          
Re: (edited: wrong link) Very OT, but calculator anyway
Message #16 Posted by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil) on 22 Oct 2009, 10:18 p.m.,
in response to message #15 by Don Shepherd

Hi, Don;

Quote:
How many times would you need a key devoted to 9 zeroes, though?
Good question. In fact, IŽd rather stay with the self-explained, intuitive [EEX]. You see, it seems to me people are loosing track of how to deal with numbers. When I see a calculator with a key to enter a number o zeroes and I associate it to the exponent of ten, I wonder 'Why didnŽt they simply add a enter exponent key, instead?" I'm not afraid of changes neither to the new, I just want them to be better and with the aid of enhancing. If one does not understand numbers, [0x2] and [0x4] may easily be associated with 'add 2 zeroes' and 'add four zeroes'. I still prefer to understand 'times ten raised to 2' and 'times ten raised to four'. I must treasure the knowledge I had access to, and the ones who devoted their lives to conclude and share that knowledge with the rest of us. I understand [0x2] because I see it as 102, but I still see [EEX] with better, scientific eyes.

What about the HP22? It has no [EEX] neither a [1010] key, but once you key in as many digits in the integer part as they fit in the display, the next number keys you press simply add 1 to exponent of ten that appears in the right of the display. That is ingenious!

Cheers.

Luiz (Brazil)

Edited: 22 Oct 2009, 10:21 p.m.

                                                
Why these keys are looking this way
Message #17 Posted by Walter B on 23 Oct 2009, 1:03 a.m.,
in response to message #16 by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil)

Ola Luiz!

Quote:
Quote:
How many times would you need a key devoted to 9 zeroes, though?
Good question. In fact, IŽd rather stay with the self-explained, intuitive [EEX]. You see, it seems to me people are loosing track of how to deal with numbers.
IMHO the opposite is true: these people use number systems older than the scientific number scheme. As you can recognize easily, there are dedicated characters (and thus words) for 10, 100, 1000, and 10000. Then, it goes on with 10 x 10000, 100 x 10000, 1000 x 10000. 10000 x 10000 has a dedicated character (and word) again, etc. BTW, apparently correction works from left to right, starting with the most significant digit. Fascinating!

You find another such number system in India, with its Lakh (= E5) and Crore (= E7). It's a little less consistent, since it works the conventional way as we know it up to 1000, then transits to an older system based on the number 100.

And for Don's question: I think the E9-key is used frequently in setting up the national budget and losses on Wall Street, for example :(

Summing up, to me it seems this is a financial calculator. Personally, I prefer the scientific number system, but there are more businesspeople than scientists on this planet, like it or not.

HTH

Walter

Edited to adapt the title

Edited: 24 Oct 2009, 5:50 a.m.

                                          
Re: (edited: wrong link) Very OT, but calculator anyway
Message #18 Posted by Ren on 27 Oct 2009, 11:24 a.m.,
in response to message #15 by Don Shepherd

Quote:
OK, that makes sense. How many times would you need a key devoted to 9 zeroes, though?

I'm sure the CBO ((U.S.)Congressional Budget Office)is getting a lot of use with theirs!

B^)

Ren

dona nobis pacem

[ Return to Index | Top of Index ]

Go back to the main exhibit hall