Build Quality of Graphing Calcs & Others

[carey]

(09-21-2023 10:06 PM)Matt Agajanian Wrote:  ...I've wondered if graphing calcs are built with the same quality amount of circuitry that 70s calcs (HP Classics, TI: SR-52/56, TI-58/59, etc.) are created with.

...it seems to me that the slimline calcs (TI-36X Pro, 30X, Casio fx-115 & 991 series, etc.) are built as disposable items since they're inexpensive (to some extent) to replace.

Others can comment on specific models, but two general comments on how perceptions about build quality can easily be mistaken.

1) The "good ole days" myth. I wouldn't want to exchange the circuit quality of any current graphing calculator model with the "same quality amount of circuity that 70s calcs" had.

2) Assessing build quality based on size, weight, or even price, is unreliable. Yes, the new generation of non-programmables (i.e., the "slimline calcs") are inexpensive due to mass production and disposable in that they're cheaper to replace than repair. However, that doesn't mean they have poor build quality. A common myth is that heavier (actually denser) products, i.e., products with greater heft when held in the hand, have better build quality. This perceptual myth is so pervasive that it has caused some product manufacturers (fortunately not calculator manufacturers!) to insert weights into their products so they will be perceived to have better build quality!