|Re: Youve misunderstood|
Message #97 Posted by Mike Morrow on 12 Aug 2011, 10:51 a.m.,
in response to message #92 by snaggs
The HP 41C had sloped keys like the 35s and it has BLUE on the bottom of the key, same as the 35s.
OK...let's try this again.
Look at the yellow shift key. See the arrow going UP and to the LEFT? That should indicate that the yellow function label associated with any key is...yes...ABOVE and to the LEFT of the associated key. But it's not. It's directly ABOVE the key.
Look at the blue shift key. See the arrow going UP and to the RIGHT? That should indicate that the blue function label associated with any key is...yes...ABOVE and to the RIGHT of the associated key. But it's not. It's BELOW and slightly LEFT of the central face of the key.
When so little attention even to small and easily corrected cosmetic detail has been exercised by the manufacterer, it's a certainty that much more significant problems will be found elsewhere. In that respect, the HP 35S more than fully meets all expectations!
Other than your hopes that it would replace the 42s not being met (which given its a 30 series, what ever gave you that idea?), why isn't it?
Sigh! The HP 35S is NOT part of any "30 series" that you just attempted to fabricate from whole cloth. The 30-series machines are the Spice models of the late 1970s and early 1980s, such as the HP-34C. There have also been other HP machines that are "thirty-something", such as the HP-35, HP 38G, HP 39GS, and HP 30b, to list some. Do you imagine these to be part of your 30-series too? In fact, the HP 32S and 32Sii are part of the Pioneer series. The HP 33S is not part of any other series, nor is the HP 35S. Some study before posting could possibly aid you if a factual presentation is a goal.
If you ranked all HP RPN scientifics made, it would have to be in the top four...
I'll assume that what you intended to say was actually "If all models of HP RPN scientifics ever made were ranked, the HP 35S would have to be in the top four..."
That, of course, is patent nonsense and an indicator of unfamiliarity with the subject. The errors of the HP 35S design, uncorrected after almost five years of production, earn it well the status as possibly the worst design that HP has ever tried to pawn off.
For $59, it probably doesn't deserve the kind of derision your directing at it.
In an age where a capable laptop or notebook PC can be had for less than $300, the persistently defective HP 35S is a very poor value indeed and in fact.
Throughout, your argument seems to be that as long as most of the time a correct result is produced, the product is satisfactory. In that view, if the HP 35S added 2.000 plus 2.000 and got 4.001, that would be acceptible because only one case out of an infinite number of possibilities was incorrect. Unlike programmers, most in the scientific and (especially) engineering professions must have significantly higher and better standards.
Those whose standards are, er, "relaxed" may certainly relish their HP 35S hot dog. But don't expect knowledgeable members of this forum to bestow an imprimatur to the selection, nor accord the praise and approval that you are obviously seeking. It's not going to happen.
Edited: 13 Aug 2011, 11:17 a.m.