General > General Technical Chat

Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?

<< < (17/33) > >>

blacksheeplogic:
My wife has found and 'put away' a lot of my calculators and no doubt she will eventually find these as well.....


Prehistoricman:
Lots of hate for the Windows calculator here. I use it very regularly.
It's important to note that I'm on about the Windows 10 calculator. I think Windows 7 and earlier had a very basic calc.
I have a keyboard shortcut to bring up the calculator that I use a lot. With a numpad, using the calculator for basic operations is just like a physical one. There are lots of shortcuts that are unfortunately hidden from the user, but you can find ones online. I most often use alt+2 and alt+3 to switch between programmer and scientific modes. Copy and paste is immensely useful. Built-in unit conversions are a nice touch.

I also have 3 Casio scientifics that I use from time to time and one Casio graphic that I use rarely.

Berni:

--- Quote from: floobydust on January 14, 2020, 11:41:40 pm ---How is it my 36 year old Sharp calculators will give answers in engineering units SI such as micro, milli, nano etc so I don't have to convert 0.00003 or 3e-05 to 30uA?

I looked at SpeedCrunch and didn't see it possible. It can't convert F or C either. Such rocket science.
Where is this modern tech you speak of from this century, that drives smoothly.

edit: added url

--- End quote ---

Yeah this is the ONE thing i was disappointed to find out that SpeedCalc did not have. Being able to type "30u*2G" and get the result "60 k" would have been awesome, so instead i have to type "30e-6*2e9" and get a result of "60 000" in normal or "6e4" in scientific or my preferable result of "60e3" in engineering. I always used physical calculators in engineering display mode too since having a exponent that is not a multiple of 3 hurts my brain.

But then again you have to type 1e3 instead of 1k in most calculators anyway so i have gotten used to memorizing the prefixes from pico to giga

As for the windows calculator the only thing i like about it is the programmer mode because i can flip bits by clicking them, it also works even better on windows 10. With these 32bit ARM MCUs around its hard for me to manually convert between binary and hex because the numbers are getting so long.

I wanted a rude username:

--- Quote from: Prehistoricman on January 16, 2020, 06:51:05 pm ---Lots of hate for the Windows calculator here.

--- End quote ---

No RPN? In the trash it goes.

Mortymore:
As with other tools, I tend to collect calculators and then scatter them all over. I live in the 2nd floor of a building, have a garage and an attic. Between home, car and work, I hate to have to go back to get something I need and forgot, so I have duplicates (triplicates...) of some tools I usually need. Assorted screwdrivers, pliers, multimeter... in some cases a calculator, is such of those things.

Even though, I install in all my computers, some of the free HP calculator emulators, it's not very practical to keep mouse clicking on the calculator buttons. I may use the windows calculator on occasion, Excel or Microsoft Mathematics and once in a wile some online dedicated calculator for things like filters, 555, LM317...

In conclusion. I have a lot more calculator options than brains.  :palm:

Gathered all my current calculators for a photo family.



I have a few more at home, from wife and kids. From memory... HP19B II, HP10S, HP39G II, Casio FX-350ES plus, Casio FX-82MS, Casio FX-991SPX, Casio FX-82SPX, Casio FX-570SPX

Out of curiosity, one of this days run a test on some calculators at home

Integral of ln(x^2)dx, from -5 to 99 (EDIT: as can be seen in the photo, on Casio FX-991ES display)

Casio FX-991ES --------------------- 3m15s ------------- 717.9281095
Casio FX-991ES PLUS -------------- 2m56s ------------- 717.9281095
Casio FX-991W ---------------------  1m28s ------------- 718 (by smithnerd)
Casio FX-991EX --------------------- 35s ----------------- 717.9281095
Casio FX-570SPX II ----------------- 35s ----------------- 717.9281095
Casio fx-9750GII -------------------- 7s ------------------ 717.9281094 (by Prehistoricman)

HP50g --------------------------------- just seconds ------ 717.928109451 (by David Hess, "After resetting various CAS parameters")
HP 39G II ----------------------------- 7s ------------------- 717.928109451
HP 49G+ ------------------------------ 25m 38s ----------- 717.928325369
HP 40GS ------------------------------ 20m48s ------------ 717.928325369
HP 49G -------------------------------- 54m54s ------------ 717.928325369
HP 48G -------------------------------- 53m40s ------------ 717.928325369
HP 39GS ------------------------------ 20m28s ------------ 717.928325369
HP35S -------------------------------- failed to compute due to the discontinuity (by rsjsouza)
HP15C--------------------------------- 10m35s------------- 718.0021 (by DrGeoff)

Microsoft Mathematics on a i5 --------------------- 0s ------------------- 717.9281094509898
48G emulated on Galaxy S8 (Droid48) ----------- 45s ----------------- 717.928325369 (by rsjsouza)


When applicable, HP 40GS, 49G and 49G+ had to be configured for complex and approximation mode, otherwise they couldn't solve. Hence the difference in the results from the 4th decimal digit.
HP 39G II (not in the photo) was a bit of a surprise. It was very fast. This calculator has a peculiarity I've never seen in any other battery powered device (excuse my lack of knowledge if that's the case). It has a compartment for 4 AAA batteries, but can run with only 1 AAA fitted.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod