|Re: Just a thought I had--a 35S Trig fix|
Message #11 Posted by Matt Agajanian on 25 Mar 2012, 9:43 p.m.,
in response to message #10 by bill platt
Yes, I too find that calculators, especially HPs, definitely HPs, should be the pinnacle of technology and mathematical accuracy and yes, the quality of HP calcs in the post-Pioneer and Post-Voyager era has been sadly lackluster. But, as fond as I am of HP and especially their calculators, I'm willing to bend my fickle precision boundary.
Yes, it's very disappointing to see HP drop the ball after such an outstanding run of Pioneers and Voyagers as well as the grandparents--the Classics 35, 45, 65, 67 and 55, Bonnie & Clyde (19C/29C) as well as the rest of the Woodstocks. I'm even rather impressed with the Spices. And that's why, I like to put HP in a respectable light. But yes, being a veteran from the day I got my first HP, a 32E back in 79, I was hooked and I never was as fond of TIs as I had been before. Ever since then, I'm the proud parent of a 34C, 15C, 28S, 42S, 32SII, 48GX as well as the 33s, 35s and now, the 50G.
I'm so devoted to HP, that I went way out of my budget to get a 21, 29C, 35A, 67 and replaced my retired 32E off of eBay.
I say all this because I love mathematics and I love calculators. I also love programming my HPs. And to support HP, although it may mean they've had a bum season or just a couple of duds in the calculator line, which pulls the rug out from under me, creating a workaround due to a shortcoming in a 33s or 35s or even a 25, is all worth it.
Edited: 26 Mar 2012, 12:12 a.m.