hp 50G build quality in today's standards (2018)

[zx_spectrum]

hello
how would describe the build quality of hp50G ?
i know it is not as good as the 48G but how is it when compared to today high-end calculators Casio classpad, ti inspire, hp prime ....
back in the day people criticized the build-quality of hp 50G because they were used to high standards of 80's and 90's
besides, how is the calculator holding up after 10+ years of continues usage??

[John Colvin]

In my experience I would rate it as poor. I have had issues with two hp50g keypads.
The first one I purchased had three keys that did not work at all, and the second one, that I use now does not always respond to a key on the first press. In comparison,
my HP49G+ that I have had for 15 years has no keypad problems whatsoever.

[zx_spectrum]

(04-03-2018 07:43 PM)John Colvin Wrote:  In my experience I would rate it as poor. I have had issues with two hp50g keypads.
The first one I purchased had three keys that did not work at all, and the second one, that I use now does not always respond to a key on the first press. In comparison,
my HP49G+ that I have had for 15 years has no keypad problems whatsoever.

shocking!!! i hear people cursing the 49G+ keyboard all the time while praising 50G

[John Keith]

I have two HP 50's and the keyboard is fine on both of them. I have owned a 28S, a 48SX, a 48GX, and a 49G+, all of which died from either keyboard or display issues. It may be heretical to say so, but I think the build quality is generally better than the "good old days" HP's.

I also have a Prime (newer version with better key colors) and the keyboard works well except for occasional double-presses on the 4-way arrow pad. The Prime feels like a solid well-made device, it is also very fast and has a nice back-lit color display.

I still use the HP 50 more than the Prime because I vastly prefer RPL to BASIC-like languages.

John

[Carsen]

I own two HP 50g calculators. Both have excellent keyboards and compared to my Dad's 1987 HP-15C, I would say the HP 50g keyboard quality is 9/10. It's quite good

[Helix]

After a few years of use, my 48GX had several serious problems: the paint of the faceplate has been altered by the grease of my fingers, one button has something broken inside and sways from left to right, and one horizontal line of pixel is dead.
On the other hand, my main 50G is undamaged after 10 years. At first glance the build quality of the 50G is not impressive, but I'm very satisfied with its durability.

[pier4r]

The 50g keyboard is a bit stiff but so far is great. I own 3.

The keyboard I love, though, is the one from the Casio 9860 or Sharp 506w

[3298]

The coating of the cursor keys on my 50g (built 2010, week 38, according to the serial number: CNA038...) is starting to wear off. Other than that, it's in good condition on the outside, and the keys work like a charm (though I wish they were a just little less stiff - the Casios' rubber sheet is horrible; a rubber dome would be nice according to my experience with PC keyboards, but it probably wouldn't fit inside a calculator case).
By the way, (not really relevant to the topic, but) I have a 1GB SD card in black that's pretty much permanently inserted. With the 50g's black case, it blends in really well.

On the inside, the situation is less pretty. As mentioned elsewhere on this forum, it suffered from the high-current-draw-when-off problem, which appears to be caused by a leaky capacitor. The capacitor has been replaced, but the repair job apparently wasn't perfect. It's been subject to spontaneous shutdowns ever since - and every time it happens, it reboots when turned back on the next time, just like after a power loss. Luckily, USB power seems to make it happen much less.
The shell is difficult to open (mine has a few marks along the edges as a result), and the aluminium sheet or whatever this thing is wrapped around the board tends to be in the way (is this supposed to be some shielding? Haven't seen this in other calculators so far). Other than that, it looks about as sturdy and serviceable as any modern board with SMD parts on it.

I can't comment much on older HP calculators. There is a disassembled 48G lying on a nearby shelf, but it's been in that state for at least 15 years. The story behind this device is that the original owner, some random student, had it with him in a car accident. It fell into the water, the insurance got him a replacement, and this one was given to my father due to his reputation for being able to fix electronics (sometimes by merely being present). The student hoped to have an extra operational 48G for cheap, but this time my father failed, and the device ended up in a dark corner of my family's house until I found and recognized the faceplate and asked my father if there are other parts of this calculator somewhere. I did manage to boot it up once, but I gave up as well in the end. I can test the feel of the keyboard, and it's about as stiff as the 50g's. The board was mounted inside the shell in a horrible way though, those metal bits seem like they are designed to break while servicing, and the keyboard and display connections look like they are prone to misalignment and poor contact. The shell isn't easy to open either, and even harder to close seamlessly because the faceplate is probably bent and curled up afterwards.

I have opened a Casio Algebra FX too. It's one of those samples with a failing flash (or maybe a few failing solder joints nearby), and as I've written above I'm not a fan of the rubber sheet keyboard (I have a hard time feeling when I've pushed a key down far enough to activate it). Right now it's lying next to the 48G, and disassembled as well. It's fairly simple to open though, just four big screws in the top section of the back half plus four smaller screws inside the battery compartment located in the bottom section. With those screws removed, the back half can simply be lifted off. My brother opened his 9860G once for some hardware modding, and it was a similar experience. My 9750G+ has screws in the same places as the AFX, but I didn't have a reason to try opening it yet. According to reports on the internet, the back half of this calculator series is additionally held in place by some sort of clips. They all have the same rubber sheet keyboard feel.

[Dan]

I've had one for 10 years and haven't had any major problems. However the calculator does turn on by itself sometimes - there seem to be a number of design issues that were never fully resolved.

[DavidM]

My 50g has had regular use since I obtained it in 2006, including what I would guess to be higher-than-normal levels of complete wiping and restoring of port memory. I've never had any problems with it that weren't caused by my own software .

The keys don't have as nice a feel as my 48-series calcs, but I'm not experiencing any problems with them. The same cannot be said for my 49g+, which started having problems within a couple of years after I acquired it. While on the outside they appear to have similar construction and merely different coloring, the 50g keyboard actually has a much better feel.

I've never been inside the 50g, but have read numerous critiques of those who have inspected their own. Most of those have been highly critical of the quality level of assembly and general construction (particularly the poor quality of solder joints).

My progression of regularly-used hp calculator products has been: 33C -> 41C (with lots of add-ons) -> 48sx -> 49g+ -> 50g. In my view, the "general quality level" was quite high up until the 49g+, which showed a significant decline. The 50g was a step up from the 49g+, but still nowhere near the previous standards. Note that I'm referring specifically to the overall "feel" of the system, not the functionality.

Functionally speaking, the 50g is far ahead of the other systems, though it is almost the same as the 49g+ (external power through USB is the main advantage for the 50g in terms of functionality). The 49g+/50g are incredibly versatile, with a large variety of programming options available that have access to healthy amounts of memory and storage, all while operating at a much faster speed than those previous units.

The Prime (by most accounts, I don't own one) is a well-built system that is an even better performer with a significantly larger library of built-in functionality. If you aren't already heavily-invested in a particular operating paradigm (eg. RPN/RPL), then you really should give it a look.

[TravisE]

In my experience, I think I'd call it average. The keyboard initially has a decent feel but seems somewhat fragile. I have a couple of keys on both of my HP 50g units that have gone mushy or crooked (broken hinges, I'm guessing, from age and some abuse). My older 50g, which I haven't used much, has recently developed a problem with some rows of keys not responding reliably (even if the key clicks) unless pressed with a bit more force. The silver coating on the arrow keys on both units has also begun chipping and peeling away with age. The battery compartment panel has thin, flimsy tabs which don't seem like they would survive much abuse, either. Rubber feet fall off and get lost eventually, but I've had similar problems with other electronic products.

The Prime feels reasonably solid, but to be honest I haven't put it through anywhere near enough use to get a fair impression.

[damaltor]

It os ok and does the job but is nowhere near the older keypads. the keys tend to bounce and because of that the debouncing delay is usually set very high, so that fast typing usually ends in missed keys which is horrible. therefore it is fine when compared to other non-hp calculators, but it is bad when compared to old HPs and even old casio rubber keypads.

[zx_spectrum]

first of all thanks for your feedback
i am really surprised about the reported keyboard quality!!!
currently i own a cheap casio fx-991ES, i know it is a cheap plastic device but even with such cheap calculator i am not encountering suck keyboard problems as keys not registering or key bouncing.
it is really shocking to me... actually according the reported feedback i am starting to make the conclusion that the quality of 50G is way lower than that of cheap casio !!!!!!!

could anyone elaborate on that ..........

[Zaphod]

(04-09-2018 04:35 PM)zx_spectrum Wrote:  first of all thanks for your feedback
i am really surprised about the reported keyboard quality!!!
currently i own a cheap casio fx-991ES, i know it is a cheap plastic device but even with such cheap calculator i am not encountering suck keyboard problems as keys not registering or key bouncing.
it is really shocking to me... actually according the reported feedback i am starting to make the conclusion that the quality of 50G is way lower than that of cheap casio !!!!!!!

could anyone elaborate on that ..........

They (Casio and HP (50g or otherwise) are completely different types of keyboard mechanically.

The 50g keyboard is absolutely fine in my experience/view, I never had a problem with keybounce on many units (I have a few of them)

I guess it’s down to the fact that the Casio is a different sort of keyboard that you can bash the keyboard hard and fast during use with no fear of causing damage. The HP keyboards need a different (only slightly) mode of use as they click

[pier4r]

(04-09-2018 04:35 PM)zx_spectrum Wrote:  the quality of 50G is way lower than that of cheap casio !!!!!!!

could anyone elaborate on that ..........

In terms of keyboard maybe (for me the 506w costing 20 eur is better), but you don't buy a graphing calculator only for the keyboard.

[Claudio L.]

I have 2, one from 2006 (soon after release) and one spare I bought in 2012.
Both have been used daily at work, plus hobby programming, including on-calc coding so the keyboard was used more than average. Functionally, both keyboards are in perfect condition, all keys register, no double presses, no broken keys. The paint held very well, I can't tell the old one from the newer one when viewed from the top (from the bottom, the old one lost 2 of the rubber feet, the glue turned into a gooey semi-liquid compound a couple of years ago, and the feet just fell off).
Other than that, you can't tell which one has 12 years of use. I think that's excellent quality, especially on the paint around the keys.

My 49G+ however, which I got in 2003 soon after release, developed a broken key a year into use, and had double press problems all the time. By the time I got the 50g (3 years of use), it had 5 broken keys, much of the paint around the keys was gone, and the black plastic rim around the calculator had cracked and was gone completely. The exact same level of use and care was applied to the 50g, which looks like new 12 years later so the difference was night and day, at least for me (my 49g+ was from the earlier batches).

[TravisE]

To be fair, I don't recall having key bounce problems on the 50g at all, and the unreliability of keypress registration on my older 50g only showed up fairly recently in time (I'm not sure why, since it spent most of its time just sitting there). If anything, setting a nonzero KEYTIME often results in an intended rapid double-presses getting missed.

The real problem I have with keyboard reliability seems to have more to do with the bugs in the 50g's OS than the keyboard itself. Most commonly, I'll happen to press a key at the exact instant as the last keystroke is finished being processed by the system (which apparently happens a lot more often than one might expect), causing the new key to get “missed”, only to get processed along with the key pressed afterwards—even if that is minutes later. On occasion, I'll also have the backspace and arrow keys get logically “stuck” and continue to repeat after being released, apparently also due to software bugs. It is absolutely infuriating.

[edryer]

2010 Model
Keys are slightly soft, not mushy, all register OK, but are "soft" in push with little "click".

2013 Model
Keys are quite hard to click, very firm and a noticeable tactile feedback.

Difference between the two models is quite distinct. Prefer the 2013 but the 2010 is no problem.

Either the 2010 model has seen more use (likely) or the keyboard was modified somewhere along the line because the difference is really quite noticeable.

[Sukiari]

I am of the unpopular view that the 50G is constructed better than the 28 or 48 series before it. Don’t get me wrong, I like those too, and I am of the opinion that the enter button is in the wrong place on the 50G, but the 28 and 48 series get really really creaky, connections fail, the battery door breaks, the screens are lousier, and the keys turn to mush. The 50G on the other hand is quite rugged, the keys on mine feel like new 8 years on, the larger screen is extremely welcome, and so is the ability to run it off USB and use SD cards. I do feel like HP missed out by not putting the enter key in the right place and making it the proper size, but that’s really the only solid complaint one could make about the 50G. All in all I am happy to have my user unit and a brand new one too.

[Jlouis]

(12-04-2018 08:52 AM)Sukiari Wrote:  I am of the unpopular view that the 50G is constructed better than the 28 or 48 series before it. Don’t get me wrong, I like those too, and I am of the opinion that the enter button is in the wrong place on the 50G, but the 28 and 48 series get really really creaky, connections fail, the battery door breaks, the screens are lousier, and the keys turn to mush. The 50G on the other hand is quite rugged, the keys on mine feel like new 8 years on, the larger screen is extremely welcome, and so is the ability to run it off USB and use SD cards. I do feel like HP missed out by not putting the enter key in the right place and making it the proper size, but that’s really the only solid complaint one could make about the 50G. All in all I am happy to have my user unit and a brand new one too.

I have the 28c/s, 48 and 50g and I have the impression, confirmed by some people I know, that the 50g don't resist some heavy using, or a fall from the desk, and the 48 is rugged enough to resist a fall or an entire college period.
The 28 looks like a little more fragile.
It's just my impression.