Post Reply 
Compensating for HP-35S’ shortcomings
01-24-2019, 05:21 AM
Post: #1
Compensating for HP-35S’ shortcomings
Hi all.

Although the 35S has a few shortcomings such as its limited complex number and polar/rectangular coordinate (mis)handling as well as other glitches, how have you here compensated with programs/workarounds that help rectify these issues?

Is there a resource, PDF, etc. which catalogues these shortcomings and provides a “solution book” if you will to fill in the gaps of the 35S?

Thanks
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-24-2019, 09:48 AM
Post: #2
RE: Compensating for HP-35S’ shortcomings
Nothing that I'm aware of. But these links may be helpful: You can find plenty of other examples in older posts.

Cheers
Thomas
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-25-2019, 01:41 PM
Post: #3
RE: Compensating for HP-35S’ shortcomings
(01-24-2019 05:21 AM)Matt Agajanian Wrote:  Although the 35S has a few shortcomings such as its limited complex number and polar/rectangular coordinate (mis)handling as well as other glitches, how have you here compensated with programs/workarounds that help rectify these issues?

By buying a 32SII or a DM42. Wink
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-25-2019, 02:42 PM
Post: #4
RE: Compensating for HP-35S’ shortcomings
(01-25-2019 01:41 PM)Dave Britten Wrote:  
(01-24-2019 05:21 AM)Matt Agajanian Wrote:  how have you here compensated with programs/workarounds that help rectify these issues?

By buying a 32SII or a DM42. Wink

And there I was sitting here biting my tongue! I was so tempted to say "by throwing the 35S away and buying a real calculator!" Smile
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-25-2019, 03:45 PM
Post: #5
RE: Compensating for HP-35S’ shortcomings
(01-25-2019 02:42 PM)grsbanks Wrote:  
(01-25-2019 01:41 PM)Dave Britten Wrote:  By buying a 32SII or a DM42. Wink

And there I was sitting here biting my tongue! I was so tempted to say "by throwing the 35S away and buying a real calculator!" Smile

And I was on the fence if replying on the same vein.

Greetings,
    Massimo

-+×÷ ↔ left is right and right is wrong
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-25-2019, 04:15 PM
Post: #6
RE: Compensating for HP-35S’ shortcomings
But in fairness, the 35S is usable, as long as your use cases aren't stymied by the (many, many) shortcomings of the model. The keyboard on mine has always been pretty good. I probably would use it if it didn't have that whole "infinite loop hangs the calculator and you lose all the memory" thing, and terrible UI for working with other number bases.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-26-2019, 12:18 AM
Post: #7
RE: Compensating for HP-35S’ shortcomings
The 35s is not that bad.

Actually it's a very good and capable calculator once one don't enter in the bugs area.

It's pretty beautiful, old HP stile, very programmable, 2 line displays, keyboard is decent, etc, etc.

Of course it's no pioneer, voyager, 48, 41, etc,

I like to use mine.

Just my 2 cents

Cheers

JL
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-26-2019, 12:29 AM
Post: #8
RE: Compensating for HP-35S’ shortcomings
(01-26-2019 12:18 AM)Jlouis Wrote:  The 35s is not that bad.

Actually it's a very good and capable calculator once one don't enter in the bugs area.

It's pretty beautiful, old HP stile, very programmable, 2 line displays, keyboard is decent, etc, etc.

Of course it's no pioneer, voyager, 48, 41, etc,

I like to use mine.

Just my 2 cents

Cheers

JL

I agree with you. But honestly (and I mean no offence), the multiple posts here that make the 35S seem like a failure and only usable as a door stop or paperweight are quite disturbing.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-26-2019, 01:19 AM
Post: #9
RE: Compensating for HP-35S’ shortcomings
In compensating for the 35S, I co-created the WP 34S Smile


Pauli
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-26-2019, 03:25 AM
Post: #10
RE: Compensating for HP-35S’ shortcomings
(01-26-2019 01:19 AM)Paul Dale Wrote:  In compensating for the 35S, I co-created the WP 34S Smile


Pauli

And thank you for makinng the iOS version.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-26-2019, 03:38 AM
Post: #11
RE: Compensating for HP-35S’ shortcomings
(01-26-2019 03:25 AM)Matt Agajanian Wrote:  And thank you for makinng the iOS version.

From WP34s Info:
Quote:iOS version by Pascal Méheut
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-26-2019, 06:09 AM
Post: #12
RE: Compensating for HP-35S’ shortcomings
(01-26-2019 03:38 AM)Thomas Klemm Wrote:  
(01-26-2019 03:25 AM)Matt Agajanian Wrote:  And thank you for makinng the iOS version.

From WP34s Info:
Quote:iOS version by Pascal Méheut

Yes. As I’ve noticed in the App Store’s listing of the app. Well, thank you Pascal.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-27-2019, 04:31 PM
Post: #13
RE: Compensating for HP-35S’ shortcomings
(01-25-2019 03:45 PM)Massimo Gnerucci Wrote:  
(01-25-2019 02:42 PM)grsbanks Wrote:  And there I was sitting here biting my tongue! I was so tempted to say "by throwing the 35S away and buying a real calculator!" Smile

And I was on the fence if replying on the same vein.

Big Grin me too: "buy a 48xx or 49G", but my favourite my 32SII to replace 35s.

Far better, if you do not need trigs, the 17BII (superb SOLVE).
Any CASIOs with SOLVE are equivalent also. And same the TI-8x or HP-3xG's (26 vars + SOLVE + programming available) machines.

If you want programming only, CASIO fx-4000P, 4500P or 4800P, 5800P, etc... (everything available on these machines including indirect addressing), the 601P/602P has no linear regression, unfortunately, in my case these units are not so useful.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-27-2019, 05:04 PM
Post: #14
RE: Compensating for HP-35S’ shortcomings
(01-27-2019 04:31 PM)Csaba Tizedes Wrote:  
(01-25-2019 03:45 PM)Massimo Gnerucci Wrote:  And I was on the fence if replying on the same vein.

Big Grin me too: "buy a 48xx or 49G", but my favourite my 32SII to replace 35s.

The problem with the 32sII is the very limited size of programming memory. But is a superb calculator.

Cheers
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-27-2019, 05:39 PM
Post: #15
RE: Compensating for HP-35S’ shortcomings
(01-27-2019 05:04 PM)Jlouis Wrote:  
(01-27-2019 04:31 PM)Csaba Tizedes Wrote:  Big Grin me too: "buy a 48xx or 49G", but my favourite my 32SII to replace 35s.
very limited size of programming memory
Yes, maybe 1 byte program counter? (384byte / 1.5byte/steps = 256steps).
And the memory shared between vars+stats and program area, that is the worst idea when the total memory limited. The CASIO can solve it without any problem: eg. 4000P ~500steps AND 26 vars. If you have 0 remaining program step, the 26 var is available without limitations.

Another example, where the CASIO is the winner: The TI-57LCD has 48 program steps OR 6 vars, the CASIO fx-50F has 28 steps AND 7 vars. When the number of required memory registers increase above 3, the very limited CASIO pushes down the more capable TI.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-27-2019, 06:55 PM
Post: #16
RE: Compensating for HP-35S’ shortcomings
(01-27-2019 05:39 PM)Csaba Tizedes Wrote:  
(01-27-2019 05:04 PM)Jlouis Wrote:  very limited size of programming memory
Yes, maybe 1 byte program counter? (384byte / 1.5byte/steps = 256steps).
And the memory shared between vars+stats and program area, that is the worst idea when the total memory limited.

The CASIO can solve it without any problem: eg. 4000P ~500steps AND 26 vars. If you have 0 remaining program step, the 26 var is available without limitations.

Another example, where the CASIO is the winner: The TI-57LCD has 48 program steps OR 6 vars, the CASIO fx-50F has 28 steps AND 7 vars. When the number of required memory registers increase above 3, the very limited CASIO pushes down the more capable TI.

I completely disagree. By having *all* available memory shared between program and data, it allows the user to choose which is more important for a specific task. If I need few or no variable memories for a task but need all of the memory space available in the machine for program steps, I can choose that option. I thought this was a brilliant feature when I first encountered it on the HP-11C that I bought in 1986.

In the Casio examples you give, Casio simply choose to permanently reserve some of the available memory for variables, thus preventing the user from choosing to use them for program steps. I would rather have the option to use them as I choose.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-27-2019, 09:20 PM
Post: #17
RE: Compensating for HP-35S’ shortcomings
(01-27-2019 06:55 PM)Steve Simpkin Wrote:  By having *all* available memory shared between program and data, it allows the user to choose which is more important for a specific task. (...) 11C (...) I would rather have the option to use them as I choose.
OK, but in this case you have no possibility to "choose", because the the memory is not shared as you understand and works like on 11C.
The 11C and 32SII totally different. The 32SII works like the 12C: if the program length is increase, the available memory together with the memory for variables is decreases.
What you say, to "choose how many registers I need" is available on eg. TI-59, TI-57 LCD, TI-65 or on 11C, 15C: you can set the memory partiton. But on 32SII this is not implemented.
The other side on CASIOs, where the 26 variable is always available, maybe a limitation, but the size of memory good enough (typically bigger than HPs or TIs: 4000P: 550 steps, 4500P: 1103 steps, 4800P: 4500 steps, 5800P: 28500 bytes). BTW: on CASIOs you can increase the memory for variables (DEFM).

I have a 32SII since 1998, that was my first HP, I really like it. I have one idea according to above: I never tried one basic thing on it: If I have limited memory for variables, how (i) works? Eg. I have 24 bytes for vars. I store something in B, C and D, the remaining memory is 0 and I store 1 in i, can I RCL (i)?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)