|Re: Nothing much|
Message #11 Posted by Steve Borowsky on 25 Aug 2002, 10:28 p.m.,
in response to message #10 by db(martinez,california)
<<there were a lot of rpn calcs out there back in the "golden age" of calculators. there were 7 or 8 makes made in the former ussr and most had lots of models,>>
That's nice to know but I don't think the Soviet calculators at that time could have influenced the European/Asian/US market one way or the other.
<a couple in germany, one in japan, one in taiwan, of course sinclair in "jolly old" made two.>
This is good to know, but i'd have to know more about the specific models to tell whether they would have been a good or a bad influence on the acceptance of RPN. The NS models for example were so crappy, comaparatively, that they may have had a negative influence.
<<ti even made an rpn translator rom for the 58/58c/59 series so people who were saddled with a ti could use 67/97 programs. >>
Yes I know about that. Do I detect embers of the HP/TI wars still burning here?....
<<someone from japan mentioned another translator rom for the pannasonic hhc here at the forum a few months ago. and yes nat.semi./novus did sell their chip for the mathematician at least once; "fate sa" of argentina made a pretty nice box, put it around the n.s. chip, and called it the microcifra cientifica. sadly-the trig accuracy still sucks.>>
Neat. That's my point; did these cheapo models help or hurt?
<<add this to about 6 or 7 other brands from the us of a. and you get over 50 models.>>
Whoa. 6 or 7 other brands? We are talking about scientifics here, right? What are the names of these other brands? I know there were some 4 function units that used essentially RPN but I don't think we can count those since the market for 4 function calculators is too broad. I'm focusing on scientifics because there people had the opportunity and incentive to see the advantages of RPN in a significant way.