hmm......this will be the calculator discussion item.

My cheap $10 8-yr old scientic calculator broke when I dropped
it about a month ago....so I finished out my last math class 
(Intermediate Algebra) using my Visor PDA.

I plan to take Pre-Calc/Trig this (summer) semester, and think
I may need something more than my PDA this time.

I've been really looking at the Texas Instrument (TI) line
of calculators, because they seem to be the most popular.

From what I've read - the TI-82, 83/+, and 86 are primarily
for math up to Pre-Calc.

The TI-89 and TI-92 are more geared towards calculus,
engineering and scientific stuff. But are disallowed from
some math classes.

 

So what type of Calculator do you own and use? (This item
is not limited to just TI calcuators).

43 responses total.

This response has been erased.

I used to have this little one that looked just like a matchbook, but 
when you opened the cover, it had the keys on the inside of the cover, 
and the little lcd panel where the matchheads would be.  I think it was 
even solar powered.  I wonder whatever happened to it...

See what you can get for your Visor.  There are some pretty nice calculator
apps out there for PalmOS.

If you get an HP, get it somewhat before the class starts.  There's a bit of
a learning curve.

I'd like to second Scott's recommendations.

I use a slide rule.

This response has been erased.

I think I have an ancient Novus 4 function + memory, square root
somewhere.  It even has a home made power supply in an aluminum box,
which I built when I was a teen-ager.  I probably haven't used it in 20
years.

Normally, if I need to use a calculator, I use Unix.  "dc" has RPN,
which is cool.  If it's complicated, I'll write a C program.  I wrote a
C program once to figure out the interest payments on my mortgage, after
my mortgage got sold to a company that couldn't keep its math straight.

Re #6: Well, I have a calculator too, but I did dig out my old slide rule a
few years ago and use it for about a year to do my physics homework.

I also have, but rarely use, a TI-35 and a TI-81.  I got the 35 for my 
bar mitzvah in 1982, and the 81 for a calculus class in 1993.

This response has been erased.

I work with trigonometry all the time, in the land surveying profession. I
began by using an HP-42S, which I learned to program in surveying school to
do coordinate geometry. Then when I began to work in the office, I bought a
HP-48GX. I am now so accustomed to Reverse Polish Notation that I find it
impossible to use a TI or Sharp effectively.

I dont have a calculator. I probably should buy one too. 

I had a TI-85 for a while.  I'm not sure if they still sell that model; I
think the TI-86 replaced it.  It will do just fine for precalc and trig, and
uses algebraic notation.  They're pretty common on the used market, too.

I eventually got rid of it and got an HP-48GX instead.  I prefer the HP-48GX,
but it does have a steeper learning curge than the TI-85.  (It's a little
friendlier than the HP-48S, though.)  It uses RPN notation instead of
algebraic, which seems confusing and difficult at first -- but once you know
it, it's actually quicker and easier, and you won't want to go back.  HP-48
models are harder to find used, because a lot of people are like me and
don't want to give them up. ;)  They're extremely sturdy, like most HP
stuff.

There are some nice scientific calculator applications for the Palm, but if
the TI-89 and 92 are banned on exams they may not let you use the Palm,
either.  I also dislike having to pick up a stylus to do calculations,
instead of poking buttons with my fingers.

The HP-48 series use standard RS-232 serial signals for communications, and
offer Kermit or XMODEM for transfering programs and memory backups.  (The
connector is a 4-pin 1mm header.  You can buy a cable, or make your own.)
The TI calculators use proprietary interfaces and software.  That may not
matter to you, but I thought I'd mention it.

If graphing matters to you, the TI's graphing functions are mostly superior
to the HP-48's.  The HP will do pretty much anything you want, but its
graphing functions are slower and much harder to use than the TI's.

This response has been erased.

For you, I'd recommend a model with a minimum of buttons.  Something
spill-proof and easy to clean would be a plus.

This response has been erased.

If you're getting an HP just for the novelty, you might want to look for an
example of one of their older models.  They're a lot more idiosyncratic than
the new ones.  (Not that the new ones aren't, the old ones are just more
so.)  In particular, some of them had tall keys with one of the functions
printed on the vertical face of the key.

Incidentally, HP's keypad buttons are all two-shot molded.  The markings are
molded in and won't wear off with use.

This response has been erased.

You might also want to look at http://www.hpmuseum.org/.  They have
descriptions of most of HP's older models, and it looks like they have a
classifieds section, too.

This response has been erased.

The TI-89 has a different user interface, and I think has some enhanced
symbolic math and 3D plotting capabilities.  The TI-90 is a radical
departure from the rest of the line, and in some ways is more like a
palmtop computer than a calculator.  It has a 68000 processor (instead
of the Z80s in their other models), a QWERTY keyboard, a text editor,
and some fairly sophisticated symbolic math capabilities.  Unfortunately
the QWERTY keyboard disqualifies it for use on a lot of exams, so it's
not that great a choice for college stuff.  It's also expensive and kind
of bulky.

Sorry, I meant the TI-92.  I don't think there is a TI-90.

Hasn't HP discontinued its calculator line?

If so, no one told the people who maintain their website.

This response has been erased.

Ah, okay.

   I have a Casio graphing calculator.

I don't think I have a working calculator.  Mostly they just need 
batteries, but I generally use "bc" on Unix or a spreadsheet if I need 
to do arithmatic.

I still have my first calculator sometimes.  A Texas Instruments SR-10.  
Here's a picture: http://www.rskey.org/sr10.htm.  Four functions plus 
square root, reciprocal and square.  No memory.  Cost me $100 new.  SR 
stood for "slide rule" which is what I used before I bought that.  The 
SR-10 was cool because when you turned on it did not automatically 
clear.  The processor's program counter just started pointing to some 
random spot in the ROM.  Often it would come up showing some kind of 
random number on the display.  Sometimes it would come up counting, 
showing number on the display that just continually incremented.  
Rarely you would get counting combined with all sorts of digits 
flashing on and off, some bright, some dim.  Quite a little light show.

I bought my second calculator for about the same price.  It was a Texas 
Instruments SR-52.  It was TI's first programmable calculator.  It had 
a magnetic card reader and everything.  I did lots of programming on it 
before it died, and I replaced it with a similar one, a TI-59.  After 
that I mostly shifted to computers and never paid for another 
calculator.  There's almost always a computer where I am.  What do I 
need a calculator for?

My first programmable calculator was the card-reading HP-65, bought for me
by a consulting client. I also used it as my everyday punchable
calculator. The calculations on which were based a patent issued to my
client and me were done on this. My second programmable was the
cassette-reading Casio FX-700P, on which a student and I did the
calculations for a paper that was published (before we all had desktops). 
My most used calculator for a long time was the Casio fx-8100 which, while
not programmable, had two timers (stopwatches), all the higher math
functions through hyperbolics, manipulations of fractions, polar-cartesian
conversion, etc.  Now I use two Annapolis "Scientific Calculator" (no
model number)  which also has all those scientific functions - and costs
$7. One lives on the kitchen table and the other in a field laboratory
kit. Finally I picked up a Casio FX-270W-PLUS, which in addition to all
the scientific functions does linear and quadratic regression. I don't use
this one much as the Annapolis is more convenient for ordinary
calculations and Excel is better for regression (and plotting and printing
such). Oh - and then there is a "business card" calculator that is always
in my pocket, mostly to use when shopping.

So, unlike Jan, how could I live without calculators?

I had the TI58C (Continuous memory) on which the battery pack died. It's still
around somewhere and still works on the AC adaptor but no longer retains its
contents.

Thereafter I switched to HP calculqators. I still keep and use the HP28S (32K
of memory) as it has built-in unit conversions and also does derivatives and
Taylor-series integrals. Though backwards-polish in nature, it's possible to
do math on it "forwards" by typing in an expression in single quotes, eg
'(2+3)*3.5/PI' and hit the ->NUM key to get a number.

Most of the calculator work nowadays I do either on the PC, or else on my
HP100LX, as it's also a PC (80186) and has built-in Lotus 123 as well as a
solver. If I replace it, it will likely be with a Compaq (now bought by HP)
WinCE Pocket PC as those will also do Linux and dual-booting.

I'm so used to RPN notation from working with my HP-48GX that I replaced the
calculator app on my Palm with an RPN calculator.  It's a pretty good one,
too -- the Palm's display lets it have some nice features, like the ability
to swap any number in the stack with the one at the bottom of the stack by
tapping it with the stylus.  For heavy-duty number entry there's still
nothing like a real, physical keypad, though.

Really old calculators fascinate me, mostly because of the clever things
they did with the technology they had available at the time.  For example,
the Friden SRW, a mechanical calculating machine that could compute square
roots:
http://www.hpmuseum.org/srw.htm

Or this early electronic calculator, which used an acoustic delay line as a
memory device to avoid having to use expensive core memory:
http://www.hpmuseum.org/ec132.htm

I just recently threw away my SR-10; must have been '98, when we moved here.
I'd always thought that counting behaviour was an indication that the machine
was failing; I'm glad to know that I was wrong.  (It always worked, though.)

whoa, I think my folks still have an SR-10 or a similar model.

        One calculator on the dinning room table, one on the bill paying
table, another in the breifbag.  One should be in an office desk.

if you are going to do trig as the first use of yu r new 
calculator, consider the sharp line (if it still exists) 
  
as i remember it, the sharp calculators, graphing calculators, did
lots of neat stuff for you .
  
the ti line is aceptably good.
  
if you wnat sometin g for the long haul, go the hp route and rpn.
  
as stated arelier, the learning curve is a bit longer, but
the results are more than just well worth it.
  
oh, i started with a slide rule in 6th grade - and almost got kicked
out for cheating! - but i don;t remember what he brand was.
  
then directly to a triple-log post (gorgeous!!!) in 11th grade (graduation
present from 10th grade) which i used through 2nd yr of engineeering.
  
changed fields and came back to calculating with an hp21 and then
on to an hp41c with all the bells ans whistles.
  
sone little shit n de4troit stole it years later - damn.

i bought one of the earlier HP calculators, and now i'm so used to RPN
that i can hardly use anything else.

I use xcalc because I got used to ten-key.  I also use the calculator on my
Palm m505, again by hand.  And, lately, dc, which is a post-fix calculator.

I still have the TI 85 my parents bought me in high school.  I love it, even
though I accidentally deleted the brick*out game program.  I thought it'd 
gotten stolen a year ago, and got really upset because they don't make them
anymore.
Prior to that I had an HP non-graphing calculator.  I had fun figuring out
how to program it for a couple of weeks, then it was just sort of a nuisance.
I hated having to use RPN for everything.

I bought a TI-89 a few days ago.....it's confusing.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss