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 24957 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline floobydust

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7681
  • Country: ca
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #75 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
« Last Edit: January 14, 2020, 11:49:25 pm by floobydust »
 

Offline Mr Evil

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 76
  • Country: gb
    • mrevil.asvachin.com
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #76 on: January 15, 2020, 12:22:28 am »
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
SpeedCrunch has both engineering notation and unit conversions.

Offline rdl

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3667
  • Country: us
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #77 on: January 15, 2020, 12:49:19 am »
For simple, basic calculations I can't imagine why anyone would go through the hassle of using a computer if a capable calculator was within arm's reach. If it was something that couldn't be done in just a few seconds, then yeah, the computer might make sense.
 

Offline floobydust

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7681
  • Country: ca
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #78 on: January 15, 2020, 02:51:07 am »
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

SpeedCrunch has both engineering notation and unit conversions.
I downloaded and tried SpeedCrunch yes it does eng units and round results. It would take some time to sort out the differences between functions, formulas and widgets.

But trying the resonance equations, I mistakenly left an extra letter "f" and it gave me a wonky answer. It seems to have used memory "f" without an operator?  :(
C = 1 / (4 * pi^2 * 15.92e3f^2 * .1)
= 62.81e-15

It should be 0.1H and 1nF cap for 15.92kHz resonance. Meeehhh.
 

Offline bsfeechannel

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1668
  • Country: 00
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #79 on: January 15, 2020, 03:56:47 am »
I pretty much quit using calculators on a regular basis both at work and at home by 1995, when I had four of five of them. I switched to computer calculators, spreadsheets and, later, cellphone calculators, which I still use regularly.

But after I started watching Dave's videos, I rekindled my interest in them and now I have a small collection of vintage calculators. Some of them are on my desk and they are fun to use.
 

Offline blacksheeplogic

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 532
  • Country: nz
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #80 on: January 15, 2020, 05:07:13 am »
My wife has found and 'put away' a lot of my calculators and no doubt she will eventually find these as well.....


 
The following users thanked this post: tom66, Berni, Specmaster, Mortymore

Offline Prehistoricman

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 216
  • Country: gb
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #81 on: January 16, 2020, 06:51:05 pm »
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.

Offline Berni

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5050
  • Country: si
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #82 on: January 16, 2020, 07:22:39 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

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.
 

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 #83 on: January 16, 2020, 07:33:26 pm »
Lots of hate for the Windows calculator here.

No RPN? In the trash it goes.

 
The following users thanked this post: george.b

Offline Mortymore

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 470
  • Country: pt
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #84 on: January 19, 2020, 12:03:23 am »
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.

910418-0

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.

« Last Edit: May 25, 2023, 09:02:53 am by Mortymore »
 

Offline Prehistoricman

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 216
  • Country: gb
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #85 on: January 19, 2020, 03:26:01 am »
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
HP 39G II ---------------- 7s ------------------- 717.928109451
HP 49G+ ----------------- 25m 38s ----------- 717.928325369
HP 40GS ----------------- 20m48s ------------ 717.928325369
HP 49G ------------------ 54m54s ------------- 717.928325369
HP 48G -------------- was not able to solve
Microsoft Mathematics on a i5 ---- 0s ------ 717.9281094509898

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.
Interesting test. I have a Casio fx-9750GII here that also takes about 7s to solve that and gives 717.9281094(50611 -  these digits were obtained by subtracting 717.9).
It also takes 4x AAA but doesn't run with only 1. I believe all 4 are in series. An old trick I used to do in school (I was the heart of the party) was to replace one of the batteries with a short pencil and show that the calculator would work.
 
The following users thanked this post: Mortymore

Offline aargee

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 878
  • Country: au
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #86 on: January 20, 2020, 11:00:43 am »
Would love one of these, more as curio than anything... but wow the price it ended at today!

https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Casio-Fx-61f-Scientific-Calculator-Electric-Formula-27/293421709079

as a general calculator, its physical condition probably wouldn't have gotten a second look in an op-shop.
Not easy, not hard, just need to be incentivised.
 

Offline Berni

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5050
  • Country: si
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #87 on: January 20, 2020, 11:45:16 am »
Ah yes having built in electronics engineering features would make it really nice. Especially being able to parallel resistors with just one operator.

But dang that price.
 

Offline IanJ

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 1818
  • Country: scotland
  • Full time EE & Youtuber/Creator
    • IanJohnston.com
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #88 on: January 20, 2020, 12:12:22 pm »
My wife has found and 'put away' a lot of my calculators and no doubt she will eventually find these as well.....

(Attachment Link)

Oooh, you have an EL-5155.......I have 2off EL-545 which use daily at work and in the workshop at home.
Not sure the difference but physically identical just about.

Ian.
Ian Johnston - Original designer of the PDVS2mini || Author of WinGPIB
Website: www.ianjohnston.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/IanScottJohnston, Odysee: https://odysee.com/@IanScottJohnston, Twitter(X): https://twitter.com/IanSJohnston, Github: https://github.com/Ian-Johnston?tab=repositories
 

Offline ogden

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3731
  • Country: lv
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #89 on: January 20, 2020, 12:38:44 pm »
I am not fan of look and feel (nor price) of it, but otherwise calculator running STM32F4 + TFT LCD with code on Github sounds like good idea. https://www.numworks.com/. Disclaimer: not related in any way, found info in ST news releases. Online simulator here
 

Offline chickenHeadKnob

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1062
  • Country: ca
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #90 on: January 20, 2020, 01:50:11 pm »
My wife has found and 'put away' a lot of my calculators and no doubt she will eventually find these as well.....

(Attachment Link)

Oooh, you have an EL-5155.......I have 2off EL-545 which use daily at work and in the workshop at home.
Not sure the difference but physically identical just about.

Ian.

When Blacksheeplogic presented his collection my first thought was: " erm, that lad has issues", then I noticed the basic scientific sharp and thought " no he will be alright". I have a EL-540D in my desk drawer, purchased 1985. Last calculator of the hand I will ever buy. I extract and use maybe once every three months. 10 digits non-programmable should be sufficient for anyone.
 

Offline smithnerd

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 120
  • Country: gb
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #91 on: January 21, 2020, 01:56:38 am »

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


My FX-991ES does it in 2m56s - I must have an overachiever (or different ROM). My older FX-991W (c2000) does it in 1m28s, but rounds the result up to 718.
 
The following users thanked this post: Mortymore

Offline Cnoob

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 132
  • Country: gb
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #92 on: January 21, 2020, 06:37:53 am »
I use a HP prime, 2 reasons, it has a nice clear display and it displays your equation so you can check if you made a mistake.
I do use windows 10 calculator mostly for conversions.
 

Offline george.b

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 383
  • Country: br
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #93 on: January 21, 2020, 06:53:41 am »
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
HP 39G II ---------------- 7s ------------------- 717.928109451
HP 49G+ ----------------- 25m 38s ----------- 717.928325369
HP 40GS ----------------- 20m48s ------------ 717.928325369
HP 49G ------------------ 54m54s ------------- 717.928325369
HP 48G -------------- was not able to solve
Microsoft Mathematics on a i5 ---- 0s ------ 717.9281094509898

My HP 48G+ finished it, took a long time (sorry, didn't measure it), but it arrived to a result of 717.928325369.
 
The following users thanked this post: Mortymore

Offline Messtechniker

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 840
  • Country: de
  • Old analog audio hand - No voodoo.
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #94 on: January 21, 2020, 10:12:32 am »
Still going strong - except for batteries of course - is
my Texas Instruments SR-56.  8)
Use it now occasionally to work out decibels  :-+

My father bought it when it was new in the USA.
Was quite a sensation at the time in Germany.

Used it to do physics homework in no time,
because math tasks had been set up with the
intention of using a slide rule.  Nowadays: :scared:
This was eventually changed. Thankfully after
having completed my studies. :-+

Agilent 34465A, Siglent SDG 2042X, Hameg HMO1022, R&S HMC 8043, Peaktech 2025A, Voltcraft VC 940, M-Audio Audiophile 192, R&S Psophometer UPGR, 3 Transistor Testers, DL4JAL Transistor Curve Tracer, UT622E LCR meter, UT216C AC/DC Clamp Meter
 

Offline Mortymore

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 470
  • Country: pt
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #95 on: January 21, 2020, 11:57:44 am »
Casio FX-991ES -------- 3m15s -------------- 717.9281095

My FX-991ES does it in 2m56s - I must have an overachiever (or different ROM). My older FX-991W (c2000) does it in 1m28s, but rounds the result up to 718.

It may well be a different ROM. In this little devices I believe that there will not be differences in hardware, like different revision boards or something. My lack of speed or accuracy, starting and stopping the stopwatch, would not justify 19s of difference between our results.


My HP 48G+ finished it, took a long time (sorry, didn't measure it), but it arrived to a result of 717.928325369.

Thanks for your information. Can you please describe how are your FLAGs configured (list of the active ones). I might have a FLAG wrongly configured in order to my HP48G be able to solve the problem.

EDIT: info on HP48G FLAGs
« Last Edit: January 21, 2020, 12:04:12 pm by Mortymore »
 

Offline taydin

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 520
  • Country: tr
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #96 on: January 21, 2020, 12:14:04 pm »
Was a long time Casio FX5500 user. After discoverying Hiper Calc Pro for android, I have retired my 30 year old Casio FX5500 and never looked back.

I'm still learning and discovering what features hipercalc has, but being able to type the equation exactly "as it is", just like an academic paper written in LaTeX,  is a very big plus and is enough for me to ditch everything else.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2020, 12:16:15 pm by taydin »
Real programmers use machine code!

My hobby projects http://mekatronik.org/forum
 

Offline george.b

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 383
  • Country: br
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #97 on: January 21, 2020, 12:56:40 pm »
Thanks for your information. Can you please describe how are your FLAGs configured (list of the active ones). I might have a FLAG wrongly configured in order to my HP48G be able to solve the problem.

EDIT: info on HP48G FLAGs

My flags are all cleared. My calculator has been recently reset - funny story - I harvested the SRAM from it to upgrade a TDS2CM (TDS200 series oscilloscope expansion module) to a TDS2MM, then replaced it with a slower SRAM. Doesn't make a difference for the HP48G+, but could make a difference for the TDS2MM. So yeah, that means my calculator was reset, so all flags are set to their default value, that is, they're cleared.
 

Offline Jeroen3

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4209
  • Country: nl
  • Embedded Engineer
    • jeroen3.nl
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #98 on: January 21, 2020, 01:24:19 pm »
I have an Casio FX-991MS and also use Speedcrunch.
Speedcrunch is a nice command line-ish calculator.
 

Offline smithnerd

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 120
  • Country: gb
Re: Do you still use stand-alone ("pocket") calculators?
« Reply #99 on: January 21, 2020, 04:38:04 pm »

It may well be a different ROM. In this little devices I believe that there will not be differences in hardware, like different revision boards or something. My lack of speed or accuracy, starting and stopping the stopwatch, would not justify 19s of difference between our results.


If you press shift-7-on (together), 9, then press shift 5 times, you get the rev. and ROM checksum.

Turns out this one is my fx-991ES PLUS (I do have a non-plus model around here somewhere). GY455X VerE, SUM 8928.
 
The following users thanked this post: Mortymore


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf