Post Reply 
hp35s amazon reviews VS MoHPC reviews
04-10-2019, 07:52 PM (This post was last modified: 06-16-2019 12:28 AM by freelanzr.)
Post: #13
RE: hp35s amazon reviews VS MoHPC reviews
I bought a HP 35s in order to 'retire' my HP-32SII to collector status.

There are few nice improvements over the 32SII such as complex number entry, vector data type, significantly improved programming space and capability, built-in physical constant library, navigation keys, and a 2-line, high contrast dot-matrix display.

Even though the 35s is certainly more powerful, there are a few odd design decisions (aside from the understandable 'must meet NCEES criteria') that caused me to revert back to using the 32SII for standard use, and reaching for a 42s or DM42 when a more powerful feature set is required.

Industrial Design:
- Although a very handsome machine, it is inexplicably larger than the pioneers.
(and is also no longer comfortably pocketable)
- Subjective, but the sturdiness, key layout, and key press/feel/reliability seems inferior.
- Alpha keys A thru F are NOT used for the HEX characters (RPN mode only)... Really? Annoying.

Still a vastly superior build quality compared to other manufacturer's current sci-calc offerings.
(with the notable exception of SwissMicros)

Software Design:
- Function algs are less reliable and programming loops more risky than the 32SII.
(I have less confidence in this calc due to the bug reviews)
- Objectively 'clumsy' non-decimal number base support.
(poorly implemented compared to every other calculator, non-intuitive and too many extra key presses)
- Function support for complex numbers and vectors are incomplete and 'quirky', which can be annoying trying to recall specific supported functions
- No native coordinate conversions, which is a very popular function set.
- No native matrix support and only up to system of 3 equations solver.
(Competition all have matrix modes, Casio and Canon have sci-calcs with 4x4 support)

System Design:
- Subjective, but seems that the feature set was too ambitious compared to the HW, at the expense of usability.
- Tries to be both an Algebraic entry and RPN... really, why... Marketing?
(IMO, should have focused on being the best RPN mid-level ever, fully implementing vector and complex number functionality, and add built-in 4x4 sys of eqn solver + matrix support, less program space is ok for a no connectivity model)
- The added capability over the 32SII is often either unnecessary (algebraic mode), not fully implemented (vector, complex function support), or hampered (programming labels/portability) by the need to keep the calculator NCEES acceptable, impacting the overall user experience and learning curve required to discover and work around all the quirks.

Yet, there are few programmable RPN scientific (non-graphing) calcs stil in production, and many of the 35s issues can have minimal impact once the user adapts to the calculator, or programs the missing functionality.

I am just not that into hand-programming left out features (e.g. matrix support) into a calculator with no way to extract programs or back-up the calculator state, so although the extra power and storage is available, it is not utilized by me.

So it just seems that this calculator type would be better served if it focused on doing less, but doing it better and more completely vs. leaving it up to the user to program the missing functionality while still having to work around the quirks and shortcomings.

Overall, potentially a worthy replacement for a mid-level scientific RPN, just not a particularly well-implemented nor compelling one.
So I cannot really recommend this particular HP calc other than it is the only currently available RPN in its class.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 

Messages In This Thread
RE: hp35s amazon reviews VS MoHPC reviews - freelanzr - 04-10-2019 07:52 PM

User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)