Considering 35s acquisition

[Tugdual]

I used to own the original 15C and purchased the recent 15CLE which I finally adopted due to the 100x faster speed than the original one. Yes there is this damned PSE error but for the rest I'm quite happy with it.

I recently purchased the Prime for the sake of having the top modern features such as CAS, graphics, touch screen and much much more. This is a very exciting calculator but I would play with it for experimentations rather than use it on a daily base. Also the size is quite big and I'm concerned I may have it stolen or broken.

I would still like to have a proper modern RPN calculator for my daily (small) calculations, a bit like the 15C but may be with 4 rows (X,Y,Z,T) and more dedicated to engineer work including unit conversions and also integer base conversions. I was considering the 35s as a decent replacement for the 15C considering my tiny spec.

I saw that the calculator had been somehow disappointing due to a few cumbersome bugs and I'm a bit surprised by the very little number of topics related to the 35s on this forum.

So two questions:
- Is the 35s a valid option or a comercial failure?
- Should I consider another option? I don't want to go into too much complexity like the Prime, just need something fairly robust and efficient for common daily use.

[Thomas Radtke]

(01-28-2014 03:43 PM)Tugdual Wrote:  Yes there is this damned PSE error but for the rest I'm quite happy with it.

Have always some batteries with you as there's no working brown out detection.

(01-28-2014 03:43 PM)Tugdual Wrote:  [...] a bit like the 15C but may be with 4 rows (X,Y,Z,T) [...]

The 35s has two rows (X,Y).

(01-28-2014 03:43 PM)Tugdual Wrote:  [...] I'm a bit surprised by the very little number of topics related to the 35s on this forum.

There were lots of discussions and enthusiasm on the old forum until the number of known bugs grew beyond any acceptable number.

(01-28-2014 03:43 PM)Tugdual Wrote:  - Should I consider another option? I don't want to go into too much complexity like the Prime, just need something fairly robust and efficient for common daily use.

If you don't mind the stickers, go for the wp-34s (saving Walter one post here ;-).

[rncgray]

Definitely consider the 34s

[Massimo Gnerucci]

Wait for the WP43s if you like 4 lines (or more).
But, in the meantime, a WP34S is due!

[xmehq]

Other than the previously mentioned bugs the 35s is a nice calculator so depending on your needs it may work well for you.

The 34s is loaded with functions and potential however the hardware on mine (30b) is problematic e.g. keys that don't register reliably, parts of the display that seem to operate at different contrast levels. The stickers are not an issue for me at all.

[RMollov]

(01-28-2014 03:43 PM)Tugdual Wrote:  So two questions:
- Is the 35s a valid option or a comercial failure?
- Should I consider another option? I don't want to go into too much complexity like the Prime, just need something fairly robust and efficient for common daily use.

It is not that bad actually. Good enough for usage you describe. 2 line not so good display (too shiny), equation writer, WORKING solver, relatively good keyboard.

[Lars B]

Using the 35S as engineering tool is possible. I'm using it daily, but the lack of direct polar-rectangular conversion is really, really (!) annoying. The easy-to-use SOLVE function compensates slightly for that "bug", but not fully.

In fact, I bought a 15C LE just because of the missing P/R function. The 15 C is exactly what an engineer needs.

[Dieter]

(01-28-2014 03:43 PM)Tugdual Wrote:  I would still like to have a proper modern RPN calculator for my daily (small) calculations. (...) I was considering the 35s as a decent replacement for the 15C considering my tiny spec.

I have been using the 35s since it was available in 2007 for exactly this purpose, and I think it does a very good job. Yes, there are some issues and known bugs, but I cannot say they bother me. No R-P conversion? True, but I could not care less. All others may write two short routines that do the trick.

The 35s really is a nice calculator for everyday work. It has a good keyboard, it displays boths X and Y, the most important transcendental functions can be accessed directly, and sin/cos/tan, sqrt, 1/x, y^x are even unshifted. Other features include HP Solve and Integrate, both for programs and equations. This equation mode is very functional and simple to use.

I also have a WP34s, and I really like its sheer mathematical power, its accuracy up to 34 digits, its versatility and programmability. But for everyday work I definitely prefer the 35s. It is so much easier and faster to use. Even commands hidden in menus can be accessed directly.

Yes, I like my 35s. ;-)

Dieter

[Thomas Klemm]

Check the HP-35s bug list. Probably not an issue considering your usage. But what botheres me is missing consistency:

• complex numbers are supported but you can't calculate the square root
• there's a 2*2 and 3*3 linear solver but it can't be used in a program
• missing decomposition of complex numbers or vectors
  

Coming from the HP-15C this might disappoint you.
But the solver is useful and you probably never have to worry about memory.
There's an emulator for windows you might want to try beforehand.

Quote:dedicated to engineer work including unit conversions and also integer base conversions

You might find this program useful: Base Conversion for HP-11C

Cheers
Thomas

[d b]

(01-28-2014 03:43 PM)Tugdual Wrote:  So two questions:
- Is the 35s a valid option or a comercial failure?
- Should I consider another option? I don't want to go into too much complexity like the Prime, just need something fairly robust and efficient for common daily use.

Tugdual;
two possible answers:
The 35 is nice. The PSE bug isn't really an issue because you can always use R/S to better effect. You'll like the 2 line screen & the keys on mine were good. There is a program here to take care of the questionable P<>R solution it shipped with. I liked both mine (one bought and one given to me by HP at an HHC) but i ended up giving both away. No reflection on the calc. I wouldn't give trash as a gift.
The WP34s is a great calculator if you use the 30b platform with it's better keyboard and not the 20b. It will just amaze you at least once per day. It's only failing is the top line of the screen, but that's hardly a deal breaker with all it will do. They put (as we say in American) "everything but the kitchen sink" into it. I only mention it because you wanted a 4 line screen and the 34 doesn't quite have 2.

I don't know which were commercial successes or failures. By the standards of other companies most of what HP makes would probably be a "commercial failure", but what other companies can point to people commonly using 30 year old units on a daily basis? You'll be happy with either one, till the 43s comes out. It's OK to be fickle in that. "One Woman, Many Calculators". -db

[Maximilian Hohmann]

(01-29-2014 02:54 AM)Den Belillo (Martinez Ca.) Wrote:  ... but what other companies can point to people commonly using 30 year old units on a daily basis?

Boeing, Airbus, Cessna, Learjet, Piper, Beechcraft, Hawker,.... (and their drivers use 30 year old calculators) :-)

And regarding the original question: Why not just give it a try? For the price of one visit to the petrol station with your car, at least looking at European fuel prices, you can buy two or three of them. Just to put the expense in perspective.

[Dieter]

(01-28-2014 11:58 PM)Thomas Klemm Wrote:  complex numbers are supported but you can't calculate the square root

Of course you can. It's true that the function set for complex numbers is a bit limited, and so the \(\sqrt{x}\) key is not supported. But there is an easy workaround: Simply use 0,5 \(y^x\) instead.

Dieter

[Tugdual]

Thank you all for the feedback; I followed your recommendations and installed the 35s emulator (or is it a simulator?). To be fair it took me some time to actually see the bugs, more particularly the ones related to cos() and tan(). I don't think this would be too much of a problem.
On the other hand I was a bit surprised that I couldn't click repeatedly on keys but had to release them for like 20ms; I didn’t observe this while using the keyboard. How is the actual 35s?
Other question is while playing with the emulator, I was under the impression the calculator was generally slow. I was even surprised that the emulator (or simulator?) was that slow unless it is a good emulation with the actual timing. The 35s doesn’t use an ARM or a Saturn so I don’t really know how it performs in reality. Watching videos on YouTube I concluded that the 35s was slightly faster than the original 15C but a considerably slower than the 15C LE. Is that a fair statement to say that the 35s is pretty slow?

[walter b]

(01-31-2014 09:49 AM)Tugdual Wrote:  Is that a fair statement to say that the 35s is pretty slow?

Let me say the HP-30b (WP 34S) is pretty fast in comparison.

d:-)

[Maximilian Hohmann]

(01-31-2014 09:49 AM)Tugdual Wrote:  On the other hand I was a bit surprised that I couldn't click repeatedly on keys but had to release them for like 20ms; I didn’t observe this while using the keyboard. How is the actual 35s?

The actual 35s is pretty normal in that respect. No noticeable delay.

(01-31-2014 09:49 AM)Tugdual Wrote:  Is that a fair statement to say that the 35s is pretty slow?

I could never make much (if any) sense of speed claims regarding pocket calculators. "Slow" or "fast" means what exactly? I would say that every calculator made after 1980 is fast enough to process every entry from the keyboard in less time than it takes me to read the result or press the next key. Which makes it a "fast" calculator compared to some older pieces in my collection that take over two seconds to compute a trigonometric function.
On the other hand, if one writes a program to compute the n'th digit of Pi or to check whether a 10-digit-number is prime one can get the impression that one's calculator might be a little "slow" to do that. But then again, nobody who needs to do this kind of calculation will do it with a calculalator - not in the year 2014 at least! - so this kind of speed is totally meaningless.

And regarding the question: No, the 35s is not slow. And it has the arithmetic keys on the good side and therefore is a good calculator :-)

[Massimo Gnerucci]

(01-31-2014 10:32 AM)Maximilian Hohmann Wrote:  And it has the arithmetic keys on the good side and therefore is a good calculator :-)

Really?
So you must have Gene's unreleased prototype



ref:thread

[Thomas Radtke]

(01-31-2014 09:49 AM)Tugdual Wrote:  On the other hand I was a bit surprised that I couldn't click repeatedly on keys but had to release them for like 20ms; I didn’t observe this while using the keyboard. How is the actual 35s?

It has been reported that the 35s misses keystrokes when operated too fast.

(01-31-2014 09:49 AM)Tugdual Wrote:  Other question is while playing with the emulator, I was under the impression the calculator was generally slow.

It is slightly slower than the 32SII.

[walter b]

(01-31-2014 11:08 AM)Thomas Radtke Wrote:  

(01-31-2014 09:49 AM)Tugdual Wrote:  Other question is while playing with the emulator, I was under the impression the calculator was generally slow.

It is slightly slower than the 32SII.

That's called progress.

[Tugdual]

Oh well, I guess I'll stick on my 15C LE.

[Thomas Klemm]

(01-29-2014 01:12 PM)Dieter Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 11:58 PM)Thomas Klemm Wrote:  complex numbers are supported but you can't calculate the square root

Of course you can. It's true that the function set for complex numbers is a bit limited, and so the \(\sqrt{x}\) key is not supported. But there is an easy workaround: Simply use 0,5 \(y^x\) instead.

Dieter

My point was that it's inconsistent:

• \(y^x\) works but neither \(\sqrt{x}\) nor \(x^2\)
• \(\sin(x)\), \(\cos(x)\) and \(\tan(x)\) work but not their inverses
• hyperbolic functions are missing as well
  

I just assume that this might annoy someone who is used to how the HP-15C, HP-42S or HP-48 handle complex numbers. The HP-35S makes me wonder whether I can use \(1/x\). Or maybe I have to use \(y^x\) for this as well? So I will consult the user guide and notice that \(y^x\) isn't listed though it is supported.

Sure I can come around this and write programs. But then I might just decide to use a tool that better fits my needs.

A good example for consistency is the use of left- and right-arrow in the HP-48. Let's assume you're in the STAT/DATA menu. There's \(\Sigma\)DAT which will just push '\(\Sigma\)DAT' on the stack. Wonder what left-arrow \(\Sigma\)DAT and right-arrow \(\Sigma\)DAT do? Correct: STO\(\Sigma\) and RCL\(\Sigma\) and that's exactly what you'd expect.

Cheers
Thomas