|Re: Natural display V.S. RPN, which is better?|
Message #13 Posted by Gerson W. Barbosa on 5 May 2013, 5:21 p.m.,
in response to message #12 by Chris Smith
Why the 48GX over the 50G?
1) Battery life.
I am using rechargeable Ni-MH 900 mAh SONY batteries on my 50g. Too often I have to recharge them before using the calculator (after not using it for a while). There is a new SANYO low self-discharge battery, but I haven't found it yet. The HP-48GX, on the other hand, will run for more than a year on a new set of three alkaline batteries, under moderate use.
2) Better keyboard.
I've had no problem with the 50g keyboard (the back arrow key has a lower profile, only slightly taller than the ON key, but I don't remember if it's always been so), but it doesn't compare to the HP-48 keyboard. Also, I prefer the 48 keyboard layout (perhaps because I used a 48GX for more than three years in college).
3) Reliable clock
Not this is really important, I could just not display it on the 50g. It is not an accuracy problem, it appears the clock just stops when certain calculations are performed (I haven't checked this yet). Right now my 50g is displaying 23:58 04:MAY while my 48GX shows 18:12 05:MAY, only two minutes away from the correct time (both were set about three months ago). I just quit setting the 50g clock.
I have been considering a 48GX for a number of reasons myself
It's slower, but not too slower when considering battery consumption. Also, it doesn't have CAS (but you can install Erable, better on a RAM card). If the HP-50g (or HP-49g+) was your first RPL calculator, you may not like it. MetaKernel is nice too (an improved version of it is built into the HP-49G/G+ and 50g), but it requires an exclusive 128K RAM card. Perhaps you could try it on Emu48 first (select actual speed) before getting yourself one.