Poll

How often is so?

On a regular basis/daily
143 (62.7%)
Only occasionally
56 (24.6%)
Never
29 (12.7%)

Total Members Voted: 225

Author Topic: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?  (Read 24970 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #25 on: January 11, 2020, 01:46:14 am »
I use one when I happen to have it nearby. It's still much quicker to grab a calculator than it is to pull out my phone, unlock it, navigate to the calculator app and load it.
 

Offline joeqsmith

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 12280
  • Country: us
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #26 on: January 11, 2020, 02:29:58 am »
I still use my HP20S.  Tossed out my old Sharp a while back after the LCD finally leaked enough that it was unusable. 

Offline mathsquid

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 248
  • Country: us
  • I like math.
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #27 on: January 11, 2020, 02:59:15 am »
I have a lot of calculators, and I use them all the time. My favorites are the Casio FX-260, a one-line calculator that's great for quick computations; the Casio FX-115e, which is a great two-line calculator that handles fractions and square roots really nicely.  I also like my TI-36 that I bought in 1991. It serves the same purpose as the FX-260, but it has a 1/x function that doesn't require a shift, which speeds some computations up.

I have a few graphing calculators, but I almost never use them for graphing. Desmos.com is, IMO, the best thing out there for graphing functions. I sometimes use them for matrix operations, but but it's usually a lot faster to use Octave (or octave-online.com).

 
The following users thanked this post: kripton2035, edavid

Offline nigelwright7557

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 706
  • Country: gb
    • Electronic controls
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #28 on: January 11, 2020, 05:26:27 am »
Nothing very original here, but I was curious about this and just thought I would make a poll.

So do you still use a pocket calculator?

I still use a Casio fx85 calculator. Its quicker to just pick it up than start looking through the PC for one.
My biggest gripe with a handheld one is no backlight and LCD is not easy to read.
 

Offline BU508A

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4542
  • Country: de
  • Per aspera ad astra
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #29 on: January 11, 2020, 12:10:53 pm »
I've bought a HP 48G / 32k RAM back in the ninties. A friend of mine bought one, too and he came up with the suggestion to upgrade it to 128k RAM.



Result:


I'm also using Wolfram Alpha for some stuff (e.g. calculating integrals etc.)
https://www.wolframalpha.com/
“Chaos is found in greatest abundance wherever order is being sought. It always defeats order, because it is better organized.”            - Terry Pratchett -
 
The following users thanked this post: Mortymore, I wanted a rude username

Offline Specmaster

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 14483
  • Country: gb
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #30 on: January 11, 2020, 01:05:55 pm »
I have a number of calculators within easy reach, but the one I use the most is a Commodore SR4912, it has a l overly red LED display and what I consider to be the nicest feel push buttons on a calculator that I've come across. I brought it in the late 70's, uses a PP3 and has a 3.5mm jack socket to accept a external power adaptor.
Who let Murphy in?

Brymen-Fluke-HP-Thurlby-Thander-Tek-Extech-Black Star-GW-Avo-Kyoritsu-Amprobe-ITT-Robin-TTi
 

Offline emece67

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 614
  • Country: 00
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #31 on: January 11, 2020, 01:53:40 pm »
.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2022, 02:44:09 pm by emece67 »
 
The following users thanked this post: fourfathom

Offline madires

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8276
  • Country: de
  • A qualified hobbyist ;)
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #32 on: January 11, 2020, 02:43:53 pm »
I've collected a few inexpensive scientific Casio calculators over the years. Of course, one is kept on the work bench. The only high-end model I have is a fx-7500G.
 

Offline MagicSmoker

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1408
  • Country: us
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #33 on: January 11, 2020, 02:58:38 pm »
Another vote for RealCalc (pro version) on the phone, but I still have various generic scientific calculators sprinkled around the lab which I use on a daily basis. I'm not a complete masochist / atavist, however: if I need to do a calculation involving more than a couple of nested parentheses then I usually open up a spreadsheet.

I never had a graphing calculator or learned RPN, despite being old enough to remember their heyday.
 

Online SiliconWizardTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15800
  • Country: fr
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #34 on: January 11, 2020, 03:00:18 pm »
Have not used a physical calculator since university. On the phone I use RealCalc Pro. It does not want location and does not share the data.

On PC I use some random command line calculator from linux repo. I think it is called AP Calc or something like this. Works fine and I have it setup to pop up on F1 key, so it is always handy.

I don't get physical calculators. I can enter very complex formulas and then go and edit whatever I want. It would be a huge pain on a real calculator.

That was the only post I can relate with so far (although I get all the others, no issue there, just that I'm closer to this one.)

At uni I had a HP28S which at the time was great. I didn't "upgrade" to the 48S although it was available as the 28S was fine for me (and I didn't have the cash to spend yet more).

I have RealCalc on my phone too, but use it rarely (only if I need some calculation while I'm on the go and have nothing else available...) I personally find touchscreen UIs to be terrible anyway except for the most basic tasks. (That could be an entire topic for later.)

The interesting thing all in all I noticed in this thread is that most people still using a pocket calculator are doing this either just from habit, or also because they just don't know (or have bothered) to find decent tools on computer. Certainly tools on computer require being in front of a computer... but these days how often do you not have a computer in front of you, or near you, while working? It's pretty rare for most engineering jobs (except as I said the rare cases when on a bench with no computer, although it's still common to have a laptop on lab benches nearby...) But beyond that obvious requirement, there actually are tons of software that are, as I and ataradov said, much more powerful and usable than any pocket calculator. And no we are not talking about the basic calculators that come with your OS, they are just ugly toys. I personally also use a command-line calculator, 'calc'. It's available on many Linux distros, otherwise it's pretty easy to build. I have it on Windows too (and it opens its own console directly, so there's nothing to fiddle with). http://www.isthe.com/chongo/tech/comp/calc/index.html
it's arbitrary precision, it's fast, it has an embedded C-like interpreted language (many calcs have something like this, but not quite as powerful and it's always pretty clunky to type programs on a small keyboards and small screen), it has virtually unlimited history (so actually seeing what you calculated before is all there, and redoing a calculation is just a keystroke away, you have also cut/paste...) OTOH I've tried, but wouldn't use any of the desktop apps that are just pocket calculators look-alikes; they serve no purpose except being toys IMO. Definitely a wrong approach. Apart from calc, I also use Maxima for symbolic stuff (and several other programs...)

As long as I'm in front or close to a computer, it doesn't take any more time than firing up a physical calculator. I have desktop shortcuts for those, it's just a double-click away (and I usually keep them open anyway.)

And after that, certainly that's also down to personal habits and preferences, but I would certainly recommend taking a look and trying at least one of those powerful CLI calculators (and don't let the CLI aspect deter you, it's every bit as easy to use, and a lot more productive, than any calculator.)

Then I still have a HP48G+. (I don't have my old HP28S anymore, and bought this 48G+ after uni.) It's a great calculator and a great feat of engineering, but I just find using a computer calc (a good one again, not the toy apps) so much more productive that I see little use for it now, so I use it more on occasion out of nostalgia (and appreciating the object.) I also happen to own a HP39gII, which is kind of an oddity (got it for cheap at the time and it was the odd predecessor of the HP Prime, I was just curious to see where HP was heading with calculators. Like the Prime, it was more targeted at students than professionals, but apart from the fact it has no CAS, it's actually pretty usable and very fast. I fired it up lately just as I found it back in a drawer.) They are fun to "play" with once in a while, but always still feel a lot less productive to me than the calc programs I routinely use.


 

Offline KL27x

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4108
  • Country: us
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #35 on: January 11, 2020, 08:37:44 pm »
Quote
That is because you never tried a an engineering calculator (like the fx-115MS for example) from Casio. These can deal with hex and binary just fine. And they also keep up with typing with two fingers. I found that to be a problem with TI calculators.
+1. Tactile keys, no lag, intuitive mode selection. If I have to look at a manual to do something, just cuz it's been a few months, then forget about it. FX 115 is my daily driver.

The RealCalc is great in a pinch for certain things, when I'm away from home. But sometimes the touch screen is just not the right thing for the job. Heck, sometimes we (I do, anyway) use things like adding machines, even. No, an adding machine doesn't have any fancy math functions, but it has features and fuctions/ergos made to detect/avoid human errors and for ease of use when adding lots of figures.
 

Offline blacksheeplogic

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 532
  • Country: nz
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #36 on: January 11, 2020, 08:42:01 pm »
The interesting thing all in all I noticed in this thread is that most people still using a pocket calculator are doing this either just from habit, or also because they just don't know (or have bothered) to find decent tools on computer.

I did not reach this conclusion and I am not sure how you would from the replies. I suspect you are projecting your preferences and views in the conclusion which is fine when stating your position but I don't think when read objectively that it representative of the the group 'Most'.

My preference for using a calculator ha nothing to do with access to software, a PC, alternatives, skill, or lack of knowledge. I have a preference that suites how I work. I also don't know from the replies the age group of those with a preference for a calculator over a smart device over a PC but it would not surprise me if there was a bias based on age.
 

Offline KL27x

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4108
  • Country: us
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #37 on: January 11, 2020, 09:14:04 pm »
Quote
I don't get physical calculators. I can enter very complex formulas and then go and edit whatever I want. It would be a huge pain on a real calculator.
A lot of humans use calculators to do more basic things than algebra and integrals and graphing, 99 times out of the 100 we pick up the calculator.

It would be a huge pain to do your taxes with a smart phone app.

Also, RealCalc doesn't even show you what you punched in. It's the most old school calculator UI. 16 + 12... oh, what did you do, so far? The display says "12." This is using a mini computer and million color touchscreen to replicate the lamest scientific calculator ever made. It's a dollar store toy calculator that also does geometry and square roots and couple other basic things.

On a lot of the modern calculators, you can see all the things you punched in as you do it, so you can doublecheck if you made an error. On the FX115, for instance, there's two lines. Even after you get your answer, you can still see your inputs, above it, and to scroll through the whole thing, even. Quantities, operations, parentheses. The entire both sides of the equation. So you can do a lot of things without writing things down, and still have 100% confidence in what you did.

Modern 15 dollar calculator is so far beyond this, just in UI/useability. Casio. Check them out.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2020, 09:34:22 pm by KL27x »
 
The following users thanked this post: ogden

Offline george.b

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 383
  • Country: br
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #38 on: January 11, 2020, 09:56:05 pm »
Also, RealCalc doesn't even show you what you punched in. It's the most old school calculator UI. 16 + 12... oh, what did you do, so far?

RealCalc can show 4 lines of RPN stack:
907510-0
 
The following users thanked this post: VK3DRB

Offline KL27x

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4108
  • Country: us
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #39 on: January 11, 2020, 10:21:15 pm »
^That sounds nice, but I don't even know what "4 lines of RPN stack" even means or what the x y z stuff on the left means.

Honestly, first time I booted up RealCalc, I was stunned at what it was. All that display resolution. And 99% of it used to replicate push buttons. It was literally a 1970's basic calculator. I guess there are more features, but hell if I know them.

Some TI calculators might as well require 1 year course to use. Casio makes a lot that are for normal human beings. I can rely on my 115. And when I spill coke on it, I can buy another. Punch in your figures and operations, see it as you "type", dozens/scores or operations, go back and edit mistakes before pressing "=".* The UI part is brilliant and using RealCalc/1970s calculator is ancient boat anchor in comparison.

I don't know how many operations it can display at once, but is shows enough and scrolling through as it goes to show you where you are and keep your place. It is great as a light adding machine, even. I have a pricer Casio with graphic display and more lines. It will even show fractions as you write them, with the bar and whatnot. But it has a bit more complexity, and I didn't read the manual, yet. So I keep using the 115's.

*Or you can edit AFTER you press equal, and the answer updates when you press "=" again. Sometimes you want to optimize something, but you don't need full graphing. You can play with the numbers and see how the answer changes. This is graphing-light, and it's completely intuitive. You don't need to real a manual to figure any of this out. Just move the cursor around and edit things, intuitively. Sad is the only word you can use to describe RealCalc. Even replicating the pixelation on the old school display, lol.

This makes me wonder if SiliconWizard has used RealCalc, or if he just assumes that since it's on a smart phone, it is not completely archaic, basically emulating a real, retarded calculator that was obsolete decades ago. What he is describing on his computer (I presume) is nothing like RealCalc. RealCalc is like using a computer and printer to emulate a typewriter.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2020, 11:06:42 pm by KL27x »
 

Offline Gyro

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10174
  • Country: gb
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #40 on: January 11, 2020, 10:32:28 pm »
Also, RealCalc doesn't even show you what you punched in. It's the most old school calculator UI. 16 + 12... oh, what did you do, so far?

RealCalc can show 4 lines of RPN stack:
(Attachment Link)

So can Neocal on my (everyday) Palm, as can the Android version.  :)



P.S. Camera colour rendition way off!
« Last Edit: January 11, 2020, 10:37:46 pm by Gyro »
Best Regards, Chris
 

Offline I wanted a rude username

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 662
  • Country: au
  • ... but this username is also acceptable.
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #41 on: January 11, 2020, 10:53:21 pm »
I've bought a HP 48G / 32k RAM back in the ninties. A friend of mine bought one, too and he came up with the suggestion to upgrade it to 128k RAM.

In the '90s I had the desire to upgrade my 48G, but lacked the skills. Now I have the skills but lack the desire.  ;D

The SRAM ICs are still available though, and even those with the slowest access times are fine since the 48G's RAM clock only runs at 2 MHz ...
 

Offline george.b

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 383
  • Country: br
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #42 on: January 11, 2020, 11:12:01 pm »
^That sounds nice, but I don't even know what "4 lines of RPN stack" even means or what the x y z stuff on the left means.

It sounds like you've used RealCalc in algebraic mode, instead of RPN. In that mode, I'm inclined to agree, it is sad; then again, I think algebraic is sad in general.
RPN (Reverse Polish Notation) is another way of entering data and operations on the calculator. Algebraic is the "natural" notation, Like 4+3. In algebraic mode, you'd enter 4 + 3 =, but in RPN, you'd enter 4 [enter] 3 [plus]. You push 4 and 3 into the stack, and then specify the operation you want to execute between the operands in the first two levels of the stack (X and Y on RealCalc). The other levels (Z and 4 on RealCalc) are used as memory. Other calculators may have more levels, visible or not.
It comes in handy when you need to do more complex operations, like, say, (1+2)/(3+4). In algebraic mode, you'd have to use parentheses, or, on a more simple calculator, you'd have to store one intermediate value in memory - extra steps/keystrokes. In RPN, that would be 1 [enter] 2 [plus] 3 [enter] 4 [plus] [divide].

I very much prefer RPN. :)


So can Neocal on my (everyday) Palm, as can the Android version.  :)



P.S. Camera colour rendition way off!

Hah, I think you're the second person I see who still actually uses a Palm! Cool :D
« Last Edit: January 11, 2020, 11:16:46 pm by george.b »
 
The following users thanked this post: KL27x

Offline KL27x

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4108
  • Country: us
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #43 on: January 11, 2020, 11:31:36 pm »
^Thanks. Did not know this. That's how adding machines work, more or less. I never used it on a calculator, though. I'm gonna play with this mode on RealCalc to see what shakes out; I assume you get used to thinking like that on complex calculations; so far I only trust myself to use RPN to add receipts, lol.
 
 
The following users thanked this post: george.b

Offline george.b

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 383
  • Country: br
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #44 on: January 11, 2020, 11:45:40 pm »
...and I mean, it's not like I particularly like RealCalc, I think it's just adequate. If I must use a calculator on my smartphone, might as well use an RPN one, so RealCalc is what I use for that. I don't enjoy using my smartphone as a calculator, though. I just don't normally have my HP 48 on me all the time ;D
 

Online SiliconWizardTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15800
  • Country: fr
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #45 on: January 11, 2020, 11:54:52 pm »
The interesting thing all in all I noticed in this thread is that most people still using a pocket calculator are doing this either just from habit, or also because they just don't know (or have bothered) to find decent tools on computer.

I did not reach this conclusion and I am not sure how you would from the replies. I suspect you are projecting your preferences and views in the conclusion which is fine when stating your position but I don't think when read objectively that it representative of the the group 'Most'.

Just re-read every post made. Apart from ataradov, I haven't seen one that, when considering computer alternatives to calculators, wasn't only talking either about the basic Windows calc (an ugly joke) or mobile apps, which I also dislike as I stated (especially for the UI thing.) So obviously if your only reference to computer alternatives to calculators are these, I'd fully agree that they can't match a real calculator. But there are much more useful and capable software out there as I cited (and ataradov), and I haven't seen anyone talk about them apart from him. So this really looked like indeed "most" people here have this preference out of actually not knowing about better software tools, and I again strongly suggest trying. It's really hard to go back once you have.

As I said, there will certainly always be a personal preference part in this. But just make sure you know all your options, that was my point.
 

Online ataradov

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11905
  • Country: us
    • Personal site
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #46 on: January 12, 2020, 12:07:31 am »
Just as an example, here is a random snapshot from my calculator history.

As you can see there is quire a bit of repetitive formulas where I want to tweak one or a few values. You would go mad doing using this a regular calculator.  Even if displays some sort of a formula display, navigating that typically is not easy.

Also note some pretty simplistic calculations (256/2 :) ). I do that all the time because it is way easier to just enter the raw numbers while occupying my brain with more important stuff when thinking about a problem. Using a regular calculator you would be compelled to do simple calculations in your head.

Also I have the full history of requests and results. I don't need memory, I don't need RPM, I have all the history of all the calculations I ever made. I can copy-paste those things at will.

All this stuff is for this project https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/reverse-engineering-fnirsi-5012h/ , in case anyone is interested.
Alex
 

Offline sibeen

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 271
  • Country: au
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #47 on: January 12, 2020, 12:50:17 am »
I've got two calculators sitting on my desk, a large button 4 banger and a scientific Sharp EL-531XH. I'd very rarely touch either. I do quite a bit of stuff in Mathcad so it is always open on my computer and that's my go to for any form of calculation. If I'm out of the office I'll use my phone's calculator for anything simple, if it's not I'd open up my laptop and fire up mathcad.
 

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28429
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #48 on: January 12, 2020, 12:58:51 am »
Just as an example, here is a random snapshot from my calculator history.

As you can see there is quire a bit of repetitive formulas where I want to tweak one or a few values. You would go mad doing using this a regular calculator.  Even if displays some sort of a formula display, navigating that typically is not easy.
For that kind of stuff you have spreadsheets.
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Online ataradov

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11905
  • Country: us
    • Personal site
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #49 on: January 12, 2020, 01:00:51 am »
For that kind of stuff you have spreadsheets.
It takes a few ms to bring up and put back this calculator. Why would I use spreadsheets for this?

I mean everyone has their preferences. I'm just sharing what works for me. I don't want to convince anyone to switch what they are doing.
Alex
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf