|Re: [WP 34S] New keyboard layout (poll)|
Message #55 Posted by Dieter on 14 Oct 2011, 8:03 a.m.,
in response to message #1 by Walter B
I prefer the layout shown in the picture (that's option 2, if I get it right). Not only because it leaves the normal distribution on the keyboard - an essential function not only in mathematics and statistics but also for everyday use in the social sciences. The arrangement of the menus on the six digit keys is nice as well.
But there still is room for improvement. ;-) I really like the idea of the two new functions Y<> and Z<>. But if there is sufficient RAM and even keyboard space for these two, why has as dedicated LastX been rejected for the same reasons (no RAM, valuable keyboard space wasted)?
I already mentioned that the f-shifted exponential functions and the g-shifted logs feel strange to me, maybe even "wrong". The reason for this may be the fact that all earlier HP calculators with different shift keys for these functions did it exactly the other way round: Take a look at classics like the HP-25, the 65, the 67 or the 34C - they all use f ln and g ex as well as f log and g 10x. Maybe this is more intuitive since - just like sqrt and x2 - the f-shifted function usually returns a result smaller than the input while g-shift returns a larger one. I think we should do it this way as well and swap f and g here. Walter, what do you think?
As others already suggested, Pi should better go to h [ . ] while the decimal marker can be set using the respective command. Which usually is only done once by the user anyway, or even by the SETEUR etc. commands. Also, SHOW is a command that should be accessible as conveniently as possible. There is a reason why it has an exposed position on most HPs. So a h prefix is the obvious choice.
Suggestion for a useful and consistent layout:
h [ENTER] = SHOW
h [EEX] = CONST (yes, it will fit)
h [ . ] = Pi
This would also free g [EXIT] for LastX, maybe only as a shortcut for RCL L so that virtually no RAM is required.
What do you think?
Also take a look at the good old 34C. ;-)
Edited: 14 Oct 2011, 8:27 a.m.