03-18-2015, 05:03 PM
I'd go for a used 17BII (Pioneer). They are cheap to come by, much better than a 12C, nicer to handle than a (expensive) 19BII, less bugs than a 30b.
(03-18-2015 04:52 PM)Tim Wessman Wrote: [ -> ]I'd vote for the 10bII+. Then again, I made the thing so am rather biased. Algebraic only, but for convenience and power both you can't beat the price.
(03-18-2015 04:52 PM)Tim Wessman Wrote: [ -> ]I'd vote for the 10bII+. Then again, I made the thing so am rather biased. Algebraic only, but for convenience and power both you can't beat the price.
(03-18-2015 08:01 PM)Anderson Costa Wrote: [ -> ]What is the differences between the HP 10BII+ and HP 17BII???Completely different machines. The 10BII+ comes with an extensive set of statistics/scientific functions. Operating it is quite complex as there are many hidden functions. It comes with a quick start guide only and is not programmable.
(03-19-2015 06:22 AM)Thomas Radtke Wrote: [ -> ]The 17BII (...) It's RPN only
(03-19-2015 07:26 AM)Massimo Gnerucci Wrote: [ -> ]What?Hehe, used it for many months but have not noticed it's Alg/RPN. I missed nothing.
(03-26-2015 02:02 PM)Ken Shaw Wrote: [ -> ]+1 for the HP17BII (not the II+). As long as you don't need trig functions and specialized programming.
(03-26-2015 02:02 PM)Ken Shaw Wrote: [ -> ]+1 for the HP17BII (not the II+). As long as you don't need trig functions and specialized programming.
(03-18-2015 04:52 PM)Tim Wessman Wrote: [ -> ]I'd vote for the 10bII+. Then again, I made the thing so am rather biased. Algebraic only, but for convenience and power both you can't beat the price.
(05-05-2015 08:53 PM)W.B.Grant Wrote: [ -> ]The name-dropping cred from being on the same web forum as the designer of the device is an added bonus
(05-05-2015 11:22 PM)TASP Wrote: [ -> ]Don't mean to derail the topic, but with really enormous numbers being used in the government and media in descriptions of large financial deals and policies, is there a need behind the scenes for the actual 'bean counters' to have access to machines with greater precision than we typically see with our HPs ??
Would 20 digit precision be sufficient (assuming accurate algorithms coded into the machine) for computing the debits and credits of a really large pension system, perhaps handling 10s of trillions coming in and going out over the next 30 to 50 years ??
Or do even the most conservative and OCD of the bean counters find 10 digits and scientific notation sufficiently accurate for noodling out such enormous sums ??
(05-06-2015 12:53 AM)TASP Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks for that. I can imagine 'bean counters' stroking out over even trifling sums if the cause of the discrepancy is unknown.
And in iterative calculations, I'm thinking even 'non-obscene' amounts of money might start building up round off errors, and if 2 differing machines yielded differing errors, I can imagine some of the accounting staff running into the night, screaming and pulling their hair out.