HP15C LE vs. HP15C
|
07-04-2014, 05:43 PM
Post: #8
|
|||
|
|||
RE: HP15C LE vs. HP15C
(07-04-2014 08:48 AM)Thomas Radtke Wrote: I doubt that a reimplementation of the 15C functionality would have been possible at HP without introducing a lot of bugs. Some bugs are inevitable...but look at the HP 30b. It is a native-programmed ARM machine that was contemporary with the HP-15C LE. While not 100 percent bug-free, it is amazingly close. Quote:And there is no reason to believe that in this case the defect brown-out detection would have been working, as it is already written in native code. All that means is that the native code programming was defective. That could be detected and corrected in the development phase. Quote:Without emulation, the 15C LE likely wouldn't exists at all. That is the core of the truth of the matter. The nearly 30-year-old complex and sophisticated HP-15C firmware was able be used intact without further development effort, except for the task of emulator creation. Critics of the HP-15C LE should recognize the compromises that were required to quickly produce the HP-15C LE...a machine intended for a rather small specialty market during a limited marketing period. I'm glad HP went to the effort to produce the oft-criticized but still "cute" HP-15C LE, but I doubt that it was a wise and worthwhile business decision. The basic ARM hardware and clock speeds of the 30b and the 15C LE are similar. The 30b allows programming the scientific-function-oriented Savage benchmark. That benchmark runs eight times faster while producing a result of much greater accuracy and precision, compared to the 15C LE. To perform this task, the 15C LE depleted its two CR2032 cells eight times what the 30b did. The gross waste of battery energy (not speed) caused by emulation is the HP-15C LE's most serious adverse characteristic...one shared by all emulated machines, including the HP 50G. |
|||
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)