What is the best BASIC Pocket Computer

[rprosperi]

(04-08-2014 11:06 AM)Dave Britten Wrote:  

(04-08-2014 01:44 AM)Katie Wasserman Wrote:  Here's a link to the OZ-707 manual hot off the scanner!

Dang, that was quick! Thanks!

Wow, I guess so!! How did you scan and assemble it so quickly? Scant hours after the discussion, it's online. I would not even have found mine yet...

Thanks Katie!

[rprosperi]

(04-08-2014 09:05 AM)david sanz Wrote:  Hello everybody,

Does anybody know wether OZ-707 card would work in a Sharp IQ-8900?

Do you know the model number that the IQ-8900 was sold under in USA? There were MANY Wizard models and they did not have the same model numbers across markets. For example, there was no OZ-8900, so I'm not sure which model this equates to. But my guess is that it will work in this machine, with the only likely glitch being the screen size if different from the 7000 series.

[Guenter Schink]

(04-08-2014 09:05 AM)david sanz Wrote:  Hello everybody,

Does anybody know wether OZ-707 card would work in a Sharp IQ-8900?

This nice site Sharp IQ Serie deals with those organizers and their cards. Although its in German, I guess anybody can derive the most important information from there.

I don't have the IQ-8900 but the layout on my IQ-9000 looks pretty similar, and the IQ-707 card works flawlessly. But the area used on the display is rather tiny. So you are better off with an organizer up to IQ-8500.

On my IQ-8300 (difference is 128 vs 256 K) the IQ-707 looks much better, although estate is wasted still.

For the IQ-9000 the IQ-8B03 card seems to be the better solution as it provides 40 characters per line instead of 16 characters that the IQ-707 provides.

HTH Günter

[Guenter Schink]

(04-06-2014 04:20 AM)Johnny Shek Wrote:  In my opinion, the term 'pocket computer' was misused by manufacturers and people for so many years. Most machines described by folks here are not truly 'pocket' because you can't actually put them into your shirt pocket, hip pocket or jacket pocket. They're better described as 'portable computers'.

Therefore, the best BASIC pocket computer is the Sharp PC-1262. Its specifications are as follows:

RAM (total): 10 Kb
RAM available: 9,342 bytes
ROM: 40 Kb
CPU: 8-bit CMOS
Text screen: 2 lines x 24 characters
Graphic screen: No
Sound: Only number of beeps
Size: 135 x 70 x 10 mm
Weight: 115 g. with batteries
Year: 1986
Power: 2 CR-2032 lithium batteries

Here is an overview of a lot of pocket computers. As can be seen the Sharp-1262 has a lot of brothers and sisters

I have a few of them, though not an 1262. But the Sharp-1403H with 32K and some science functions keys is at least a nice alternate, only slightly longer.

What is a Pocket Computer?

Günter

[rprosperi]

(04-08-2014 03:49 PM)Guenter Schink Wrote:  

(04-08-2014 09:05 AM)david sanz Wrote:  Hello everybody,

Does anybody know wether OZ-707 card would work in a Sharp IQ-8900?

This nice site Sharp IQ Serie deals with those organizers and their cards. Although its in German, I guess anybody can derive the most important information from there.

I don't have the IQ-8900 but the layout on my IQ-9000 looks pretty similar, and the IQ-707 card works flawlessly. But the area used on the display is rather tiny. So you are better off with an organizer up to IQ-8500.


HTH Günter

Thanks Gunter, it helped my memory tremendously!

The IQ-8900/8920 is equivalent to US model OZ-9500/9520, so yes it will definitely work on these models, though as noted here, the 707 card was designed for the original, smaller LCD so it's output is limited to the original sized LCD area (you can only use a portion of the LCD for Program output).

Also, as Gunter notes, the IQ-8B03 was designed for the original 8000 series and has 40 chars wide output (vs. 16 in 707), but this too uses only a portion of the LCD on the 8900 as it is much "taller" than the original 8000 series.

The link Gunter provided has all the machine specs to make the above comments easier to understand.

Have fun!

[Katie Wasserman]

Quote:Wow, I guess so!! How did you scan and assemble it so quickly? Scant hours after the discussion, it's online. I would not even have found mine yet...

What, your all-in-one printer didn't come with a team of scanner elves?

[Bill (Smithville NJ)]

Hi Katie,

Quote:What, your all-in-one printer didn't come with a team of scanner elves?

Since I know a lot of people here like to scan in old documentation, I thought I'd recommend a scanner for them. I've given up on flat bed scanners (except for photos).

Last year I picked up a Fujitsu ScanSnap iX500. Reasonably priced (less than $500), small enough to set on corner of desk, and can scan 25 sheets, both sides, per minute in color. In a half hour, I can scan a 500 page manual and have a perfect PDF. I cut the spline off, scan it in and then have it spiral bound at Staples. It also has Wi-Fi so you can scan directly to a computer, tablet or cell phone (although I've never used it that way , other than to test it).

The ScanSnap is so easy to use, I find myself scanning in almost everything. I really prefer a paperless office.

I know - off topic - but thought some of you might be interested.

Bill

[Dave Britten]

Oh, here's one I don't think anybody has mentioned yet. The TRS-80 Model 100/102, while not pocket sized, is still extremely portable, and the sacrifice of pocketability gives you a nice big screen, a full-sized keyboard, great battery life, and loads of peripheral options.

I don't THINK you can define functions that accept parameters or return a value (please prove me wrong), but it's got GOSUB like any other BASIC from MS (yeah, MS did the software on this thing). The RAM disk lets you store as many separate programs and documents as will fit in memory, which is the one thing that I think is most sorely lacking from the old Sharp pockets (including the Tandy PC-1, PC-2, and PC-3).

There's also the Model 200, but they can't be had cheaply, and are much larger with their full clamshell design.

[Bill (Smithville NJ)]

Hi Dave,

Quote:Oh, here's one I don't think anybody has mentioned yet. The TRS-80 Model 100/102,

I agree - the Model 100/102 are great portable computers. And they were useful long after anyone thought they would be. Reporters loved them. Good keyboard, nice screen, and ran for a long time on easily found AA batteries. What notebook at that time could say that.

Bill

[Katie Wasserman]

Quote:The ScanSnap

Sounds like a nice scanner and I like your idea of cutting and rebinding.

The Epson AIO I was using (WF-7520) is a pretty fast double-sided scanner and I was tempted to cut the OZ-707 manual and make use of it. But it's printed on really bad paper, essentially newsprint, and I wasn't sure it would survive the cutting or the trip through the document feeder.

[rprosperi]

(04-08-2014 08:40 PM)Katie Wasserman Wrote:  

Quote:Wow, I guess so!! How did you scan and assemble it so quickly? Scant hours after the discussion, it's online. I would not even have found mine yet...

What, your all-in-one printer didn't come with a team of scanner elves?

(04-08-2014 09:53 PM)Bill (Smithville NJ) Wrote:  Hi Katie,

Quote:What, your all-in-one printer didn't come with a team of scanner elves?

Last year I picked up a Fujitsu ScanSnap iX500. Reasonably priced (less than $500), small enough to set on corner of desk, and can scan 25 sheets, both sides, per minute in color. In a half hour, I can scan a 500 page manual and have a perfect PDF. I cut the spline off, scan it in and then have it spiral bound at Staples. It also has Wi-Fi so you can scan directly to a computer, tablet or cell phone (although I've never used it that way , other than to test it).

Bill

Sadly Katie, no elves, and its even an HP! I guess I didn't get the right bundle. It happens when you buy online; you just can't tell what you might end up with...

And I agree with Bill's recommendation - the Fujitsu scanners aren't cheap, but they are the best ones available period, as long as you don't need a flatbed. I've installed some that scan 500+ pages a day, every day. They just keep working and never jam. Recommended if you do a lot of scanning.

[Bill (Smithville NJ)]

Quote:printed on really bad paper, essentially newsprint, and I wasn't sure it would survive the cutting or the trip through the document feeder

That can be a problem. I've had some success by using the auto feed at maximum resolution. On the ScanSnap, this will slow down the feed mechanism and it eliminates the possibility of tearing or jamming. The feed is about one fourth of the normal speed. The lower speed helps with delicate pages. You still have to watch for little tears in the original. If these are repaired with clear tape, then I can usually get a good feed.

The big advantage of the ScanSnap is that it's a straight thru document feeder - hopper on top and then straight thru - no curving of the input sheets. This helps a lot. That's one of the reasons I settled on it. Plus Fujitsu makes replacement, do-it-yourself, chinch wheel kits. As they wear out over time, you can just buy a kit and pop in new wheels.

I just checked the counter and I have scanned in 10,097 sheets, most of which were double sided. The rollers are supposed to be good for 200,000 sheets, so I guess I have a way to go before they will need replacing. I better get busy scanning more stuff.

Bill

[Johnny Shek]

(04-08-2014 04:30 PM)Guenter Schink Wrote:  Here is an overview of a lot of pocket computers. As can be seen the Sharp-1262 has a lot of brothers and sisters

I have a few of them, though not an 1262. But the Sharp-1403H with 32K and some science functions keys is at least a nice alternate, only slightly longer.

What is a Pocket Computer?

Günter

As you can see, only Sharp printed 'Pocket Computer' on its products even though most of them weren't small enough to fit into any pocket. Casio printed 'Personal Computer', 'Programmable Calculator' (for FX-702P) or 'Handheld Computer' (for FP-200) on its products. HP and TI didn't deliberately print anything on their products but they usually called them handheld or portable computers in their promotional materials. Obviously, the term 'Pocket Computer' isn't so appropriate for this category of products.

[Bill (Smithville NJ)]

Quote:even though most of them weren't small enough to fit into any pocket

Yep, you would need an overcoat size pocket! But marketing, being marketing, will call it anything they want to, if they think it enhances the image, and makes it sell (mainly if they think it will help sell it!).

I remember having several "portable" computers that were what we referred to as "Luggable".

Bill

[Bill (Smithville NJ)]

Namir,

Please come back into the discussion.

Do any of the suggested "pocket" computers meet your requirements?

If not, why not.

Did we miss any computers that you are aware of.

I would like to get your opinion on them.

Bill

[Alvaro]

[/quote]

As you can see, only Sharp printed 'Pocket Computer' on its products even though most of them weren't small enough to fit into any pocket. Casio printed 'Personal Computer', 'Programmable Calculator' (for FX-702P) or 'Handheld Computer' (for FP-200) on its products. HP and TI didn't deliberately print anything on their products but they usually called them handheld or portable computers in their promotional materials. Obviously, the term 'Pocket Computer' isn't so appropriate for this category of products.
[/quote]

The CASIO FX-850p is well protected and is so slim that easily fits in coat or even shirt pocket.
Is a bit long but no problem to carry it in a pocket.

[Alvaro]

[/quote]

As you can see, only Sharp printed 'Pocket Computer' on its products even though most of them weren't small enough to fit into any pocket. Casio printed 'Personal Computer', 'Programmable Calculator' (for FX-702P) or 'Handheld Computer' (for FP-200) on its products. HP and TI didn't deliberately print anything on their products but they usually called them handheld or portable computers in their promotional materials. Obviously, the term 'Pocket Computer' isn't so appropriate for this category of products.
[/quote]

The CASIO FX-850p is well protected and is so slim that easily fits in coat or even shirt pocket.
Is a bit long but no problem to carry it in a pocket.

[Johnny Shek]

(04-09-2014 11:54 AM)Bill (Smithville NJ) Wrote:  Yep, you would need an overcoat size pocket! But marketing, being marketing, will call it anything they want to, if they think it enhances the image, and makes it sell (mainly if they think it will help sell it!).

I remember having several "portable" computers that were what we referred to as "Luggable".

Bill

Yes, it's more of a hype than a truth!

Here are my choices:

Truly pocket: Sharp PC-1262
Handheld/portable: Sharp PC-E500S

[Bill (Smithville NJ)]

(04-09-2014 03:16 PM)Johnny Shek Wrote:  Here are my choices:

Truly pocket: Sharp PC-1262
Handheld/portable: Sharp PC-E500S

I agree on the PC-1262. I have one with the printer/cassette and it's a great little computer. And will easily slide into a pocket.

On the Handheld, I go for the Sharp PC-1600. The interchangeable ram modules make it a winner in my book. And, of course, I love that its processor is a Z-80. The Z-80 was my first computer, so I have a fondness for it,

A second place on the handheld might be the Sharp PC-1360. I've never had one, but have played with the Android emulator for it. It's pretty impressive. I think the real unit is a little smaller than the PC-1600. But still not really pocketable.

I'm not that familiar with the Sharp PC-E500S. But from what I read on the web, it looks like a worthy contender also.

Bill

[Dave Britten]

Here's a question that occurred to me today: are there any particularly good programmable calculator/development environments for Windows CE? There are tons of old H/PC models available, and I've got a MobilePro 900 with a big keyboard that could be used to great effect.