Gauging interest in a DM48 or DM50?

[c3d]

Having been prompted by one of the more enthusiastic users of DB48X, I'd like to run a quick poll to gauge interest in a SwissMicros DM50 defined as follows:

- Same hardware as DM32/DM42n
- Keys and faceplate matching the DB48x layout
- Pre-loaded with latest DMCP and DB50X release

[Eric Rechlin]

Having SwissMicros recognize your effort with an additional model for your software would be fantastic. Just some comments:

1. I worry that calling it a DM48 or DM50 will set some potential customers up for disappointment when they realize it's not 100% compatible with the HP 48 or HP 50, since all the other DM models are essentially completely compatible with the models they share a number with. Maybe DM51 or something? Or just call it DB48X with no DM in the name?

2. Not looking forward to spending another $300, but it would be so so tempting.

3. I wish SwissMicros could do a calculator with another row of keys because it's so hard to do everything with this limited key layout. You've done an amazing job making everything work, especially with the double-tap shift key approach, but being able to have two shift keys, an alpha key, and all four arrows on unshifted keys would make the calculator a lot less tedious to use, especially once you add more functionality that will take advantage of the arrow keys.

Right now (aside from lack of time) the main thing that has kept me away from playing with DM48X/DM50X much is the fact that I can really only play with the browser version, since there isn't a native version for any of my platforms (Windows or Android), and I'm not ready to convert my DM32 or DM42. The UI is so different from that of the 48/49/50 that it's taking me a long time to get used to how things work. But I check it out every once in a while and continue to be impressed with the impressive functionality.

[polbit]

I think it has been well established that SwissMicros is unwilling to take on the 48/50 model despite many people asking for it. It is what it is. RPL plight is real...

[rprosperi]

I concur with a couple of Eric's comments above.

1. Calling them "DMxx" is a bad idea as that's the naming scheme used by SwissMicros and usurping it, even for alternate f/w that runs on their devices is a bad idea. This is not a legal comment, just sensible advice for a small, tight community.

2. Using e.g. DB48X for a somewhat similar work-alike is indeed going to end up being confusing as many 'users' will presume it's just like an HP-48 and be utterly confused, or assume it's defective, or worse. Get their attention immediately by using a different model number as Eric suggested, or some other naming scheme variation. The trailing X is good, but likely better alternatives can be found.

Al of which is not to suggest to make it more like a 48 (or a 50), we have that already, please continue the innovation and continue to create newer, and better device behavior.

[Jase]

(10-01-2024 02:02 AM)polbit Wrote:  I think it has been well established that SwissMicros is unwilling to take on the 48/50 model despite many people asking for it. It is what it is. RPL plight is real...

Relatively new to this forum, so forgive me if my question is obvious, but do we know why SM is unwilling to consider a 48/50 model?

Is it because the owner does not like RPL and prefers RPN?
Is it merely the amount of work, and return on investment?

Thanks for any insight.
Jase.

[carey]

While RPN is a number & operation entry method, RPL is an object-oriented programming language that evolved from the early hp28c to the hp48g (later RPL models added a CAS but that's incidental to RPL, e.g., the algebraic HP40g included nearly the same CAS).

This has several implications:
1) It would be nice to see a calculator-independent desktop implementation of RPL (that doesn't need a CS degree to install and run on Windows) allowing RPL to be used by beginners as a general numerical programming language suitable for scientific computing (e.g., as an alternative to NumPy).
2) Considerable wisdom went into the development and evolution of RPL and is another reason to maintain compatibility (in either desktop or new calculator RPL implementations) before adding extensions (similar to the approach taken with Plus42 of providing sensible enhancements to Free42's 42s compatibility layer).

[c3d]

(10-01-2024 12:46 PM)Jase Wrote:  

(10-01-2024 02:02 AM)polbit Wrote:  I think it has been well established that SwissMicros is unwilling to take on the 48/50 model despite many people asking for it. It is what it is. RPL plight is real...

Relatively new to this forum, so forgive me if my question is obvious, but do we know why SM is unwilling to consider a 48/50 model?

Is it because the owner does not like RPL and prefers RPN?
Is it merely the amount of work, and return on investment?

Thanks for any insight.
Jase.

TL;DR: The SwissMicros standard recipe does not apply, and they got burnt once trying something else.

I'll try to represent them fairly, but I do not speak for them, this comment is only based on earlier discussions with them.

First, SwissMicros does something which is very smart, which is to focus on a specific niche market. Their current niche is HP calculator enthusiasts, and the way they approach it is by building calculators that faithfully emulate existing HP models. While they can improve slightly, e.g. with larger and better screens, running faster, showing multiple stack levels, or including a built-in help viewer, the basic rule is that the existing HP manuals should apply just as well to the corresponding DM model. This goes all the way down to exact placement key and labelling, or simulating printing.

They only deviated once from this philosophy, and I believe they see that as a disaster. They worked with the WP43 team to try and bring a non-HP calculator, albeit one that was clearly "in the spirit of" RPN calculators. Prototypes of the calculator were built, but then there was a dispute. I was not part of that dispute, so I can only report hearsay, but my understanding is that the creator of the WP43 project and the SwissMicros team could not come to an agreement regarding who would own the really impressive user manual. In any case, my impression is that SwissMicros derived all the wrong lessons from that, namely that working with an "external R&D department" was dangerous, and that they'd better stick to the known evils of existing HP calculators.

In my opinion, this clash is the root cause of their current position regarding DB48x, and the rest is just rationalization, but as you can expect, this is rationalization with a pretty solid grain of truth in it.

As you pointed out, moving from emulating RPN calculators to emulating RPL ones is quite a big leap. Part of the problem is what it would mean to be "compatible". To the extent where the HP48, 49 and 50 were routinely programmed in Saturn assembly language, and even grew pretty extensive catalog of games, as well as really sophisticated binaries like the MetaKernel, there is no way you can claim that you deliver a "compatible" calculator if it can't run, among other things, my Lemmings game.

Achieving this level of compatibility can be done. There are several applications that faithfully emulate HP calculators. I have iHP48 and i48 on my iPhone, to just name two, and despite the name, iHP48 at least can emulate the HP50 just as well. However, to reach that level of compatibility, these applications are true hardware emulators, and they require a copy of the HP ROMs. HP has made the ROMs available for download, but under conditions that make it impossible to build a commercial product around it, and also impossible to improve them. This approach will never deliver 34-digit computations like the DM42 does (or variable precision like DB48x does), simply because in order to be compatible, you need to keep the exact same format for numbers, and the HP ROM only has support for 12 and 15 digits numbers if memory serves me right (15-digits being only used for internal calculations).

So this means that SwissMicros cannot, legally, do a faithful DM48, and cannot technically improve over the original. It's possible that they could do a "Buy our calculator and download the ROMs yourself" calculator, but I suspect that would be legally fishy, and again, they would be unable to improve computation precision or the display resolution. The ROM itself would take quite a bit of space, but I think that's not major. They'd have to display 131x80 pixels on their beautiful 400x240 screen, which would be either tiny or ugly. Not to mention that technically, the HP50G hardware supports grayscale, whereas the SwissMicros displays are all strictly black and white. The keyboard would need one more rows of keys (probably not super major, but still more work than changing the key labels). Real compatibility with the HP48 would require two-way infrared, a serial interface and slots for the HP expansion cards (well, they might skip that since they skipped it for the DM41). Real compatibility with the HP50 would imply adding an SD-Card reader, and the ENTER key placement would have to be infinitely wrong, instantly vaporizing their entire fanbase into a never-ending flamewar. And so on.

This is the reason I took a completely different route with DB48x. Despite having a vested interest in binary compatibility myself, I decided that what I really wanted was a better calculator, not some decades-old poor man's Gameboy. As an aside, the reason the HP48 was so exciting for games is that, back then, the Gameboy was a novelty. Not to mention that HP48 games and other programs could be copied through infrared, which explains how my games or the MetaKernel, both written in France, can still be found archived on a US server today. But if you want a portable gaming console today, you probably won't pick the HP48. If you want a high-end calculator on the other hand, it remains quite relevant and hard to improve on. People who install the app on their iPhone don't use it for games, methinks. At least I didn't.

I believe that there is a need for a high-end, efficient, programmable scientific calculator, and that as an engineer, sugar-coated education tools for students, as good as they can be, are not what I need. It's really a shame that the do-not-cheat-during-exams laws forced HP, TI or Casio to choose between engineers/researchers and students. They all chose students for obvious $$$ reasons, and as we all know, this led to calculators that are extremely fancy, with ton of advanced math under the hood, but where a consistent and efficient user interface is thrown away in favor of glitzy "apps".

My own experience with the HP Prime is revealing in that respect. While I have an HP Prime, I can't port DB48x to it because HP had to clamp it down tight to prevent smart students from circumventing the exam mode. So you can't really install your own firmware on it. DB48x on HP50g is more likely than on the HP Prime, which is a shame. The HP Prime keyboard, screen, processor and memory would be fantastic for the project, but presently, the only thing I can run on my HP Prime is the original HP software. I installed the HP Prime app on my iPhone, tested it a few times out of curiosity, but then never actually used it, just like I practically never use my Prime except to check how it deals with this or that math problem. Truth to be told, at least to me, the HP Prime is essentially useless, whereas iHP48 remained quite useful for years. When I needed a computation done, I would pop my iPhone and launch iHP48. That no longer happens as often nowadays, since I typically use DB48x instead.

[c3d]

(10-01-2024 04:26 PM)carey Wrote:  While RPN is a number & operation entry method, RPL is an object-oriented programming language that evolved from the early hp28c to the hp48g (later RPL models added a CAS but that's incidental to RPL, e.g., the algebraic HP40g included nearly the same CAS).

This has several implications:
1) It would be nice to see a calculator-independent desktop implementation of RPL (that doesn't need a CS degree to install and run on Windows) allowing RPL to be used by beginners as a general numerical programming language suitable for scientific computing (e.g., as an alternative to NumPy).

I'm curious about what you are asking for here, specifically:

1) When you say "desktop implementation", is the current DB48X simulator close to what you have in mind, or are you thinking about something more like a library? Or maybe a command-line interface? Or simply building and distributing Windows binaries? I'm asking notably because of the NumPy reference.

2) I'm a bit confused by the combination of "No CS degree" and "alternative to NumPy" :-)

Quote:2) Considerable wisdom went into the development and evolution of RPL and is another reason to maintain compatibility (in either desktop or new calculator RPL implementations) before adding extensions (similar to the approach taken with Plus42 of providing sensible enhancements to Free42's 42s compatibility layer).

I'm trying to carefully document deviations from RPL, and I often provide compatibility flags. That being said, while RPL design is remarkable, it was also a somewhat messy evolution over time.

Extensions are another matter, though, and there I do not fully agree with you. Specifically, I will happily put an extension letting you draw in color and with patterns before support for obscure functions such as F0λ.

[c3d]

(09-30-2024 06:29 PM)Eric Rechlin Wrote:  Having SwissMicros recognize your effort with an additional model for your software would be fantastic. Just some comments:

1. I worry that calling it a DM48 or DM50 will set some potential customers up for disappointment when they realize it's not 100% compatible with the HP 48 or HP 50, since all the other DM models are essentially completely compatible with the models they share a number with. Maybe DM51 or something? Or just call it DB48X with no DM in the name?

I have thought about DM51 when writing the poll, actually :-). I think it is important to recognize that DM in the name are the initials of the company founders, so I'd rather keep that for their hardware. Of course, if they were OK with the idea of prefix change, then I would feel honored, but the recognition goes both ways.

Quote:2. Not looking forward to spending another $300, but it would be so so tempting.

SwissMicros calculators are too expensive. Right now, they can only reach a (dying of old age) hobbyist market. I designed DB48X to be a platform for calculators that are "in the spirit of" HP, and by that I mean "innovative and at the edge of what can be done with today's hardware".

I stress out "platform". I fully expect, once we reach 1.0, to add tons of configuration options to quickly build stripped down, simpler versions with reduced functionality. Think of it as a college-level DB35x, etc. It is not even that hard to convert the core of DB48X to RPN-only, keystroke programmable. The whole design of DB48x is intended to be able to go there when time comes.

So I would like SwissMicros to consider having a line of "modern but incompatible" devices in addition to their "fully compatible" line. Maybe the DB prefix could be used for that line. I suspect that this could probably allow them to reach larger markets and reduce prices long term. If they don't, I'm afraid some other company might.

Quote:3. I wish SwissMicros could do a calculator with another row of keys because it's so hard to do everything with this limited key layout. You've done an amazing job making everything work, especially with the double-tap shift key approach, but being able to have two shift keys, an alpha key, and all four arrows on unshifted keys would make the calculator a lot less tedious to use, especially once you add more functionality that will take advantage of the arrow keys.

I can't disagree with that. That would be even better, but that's additional work for SwissMicros, notably on the firmware side. If they go that route, I would much prefer the HP48 key layout, I really can't get used to the HP50 tiny enter key, I can't even type an addition without getting it wrong!

Quote:Right now (aside from lack of time) the main thing that has kept me away from playing with DM48X/DM50X much is the fact that I can really only play with the browser version, since there isn't a native version for any of my platforms (Windows or Android),

There is a lot of demand for those. I need to find the time. In theory, it's easy. It's mostly a matter of doing it.

Quote: and I'm not ready to convert my DM32 or DM42. The UI is so different from that of the 48/49/50 that it's taking me a long time to get used to how things work.

Can you think of anything I could do to make it easier? Do you remember the things that annoyed you the most?

Quote: But I check it out every once in a while and continue to be impressed with the impressive functionality.

Thanks!

[c3d]

(10-01-2024 02:21 AM)rprosperi Wrote:  I concur with a couple of Eric's comments above.

1. Calling them "DMxx" is a bad idea as that's the naming scheme used by SwissMicros and usurping it, even for alternate f/w that runs on their devices is a bad idea. This is not a legal comment, just sensible advice for a small, tight community.

I wish to also recognize that it's a "David & Michael" physical device. Maybe they don't need that recognition. Alternatives would include: "DM51" (refers to a nonexistent HP device, so no expectation of any compatibility), "DB48x" and starting a "non-compatible" line, and probably many others.

Quote:2. Using e.g. DB48X for a somewhat similar work-alike is indeed going to end up being confusing as many 'users' will presume it's just like an HP-48 and be utterly confused, or assume it's defective, or worse.

That concern was raised by Michael quite a few times, and frankly, I believe that it's misguided. I never had anyone complain that they were confused about it not faithfully emulating an HP48. On the web site and in all my communication, I always use the phrase "in the spirit of", and to me that means the spirit of innovation, pushing boundaries, and providing a great pocket calculator.

It does not mean there is no negative feedback. There were comments about the UI being different. There were bug reports about functions not working correctly (e.g. recently about collect / expand being broken) which, to be clear, are definitely considered as bugs since the spec is the HP manuals. I received comments about wanting a second shift key, arrow keys, a dedicated alpha key, and so on. But there has never been any complaint about any kind of confusion like "I tried to run the HP48 Lemmings on it and I don't know how to do it".

On the other hand, the reference to the HP-48 is totally intentional and I would argue it is necessary to set expectations about what you are getting. You are not getting an RPN calculator, you are not getting a Prime-style app marshmallow. If anything, the analytics I get for the iOS version confirm that referencing this mythical calculator is the right choice, and that people know what they get.

Quote: Get their attention immediately by using a different model number as Eric suggested, or some other naming scheme variation. The trailing X is good, but likely better alternatives can be found.

I'm not sure who "they" is in this comment, SwissMicros or potential customers? If we are talking about customers, then wouldn't "DM51" be counter-productive? Maybe not, after all this was the WP43S / C47 route.

Quote:Al of which is not to suggest to make it more like a 48 (or a 50), we have that already, please continue the innovation and continue to create newer, and better device behavior.

Thanks.

[Jase]

(10-01-2024 09:40 PM)c3d Wrote:  TL;DR: The SwissMicros standard recipe does not apply, and they got burnt once trying something else.

Wow, thanks for that detailed write-up.
I did some searching and found this SwissMicros / WP43 machine (see screenshot).

It's too bad that this endeavor all fell apart in the end.

I just got my first SM in the mail - the DM 42n. It's a whole new world since I never owned an hp 41 nor hp 42. I cut my teeth on hp 28c/s and 48gx. (Recently bought a 50g and Prime, but haven't really touched those yet)

Anyway, thanks again for your time in explaining all that. Much appreciated.
Jase.
   

[carey]

(10-01-2024 10:07 PM)c3d Wrote:  I'm curious about what you are asking for here, specifically:

First, thank you for your thoughtful reply and great work! I'm very happy with the DB48X iphone app and the desktop browser simulator couldn't be easier to use. It's just that I have a fanciful hope that (someday) someone will write a desktop RPL implementation not tethered to a calculator.

(10-01-2024 10:07 PM)c3d Wrote:  1) When you say "desktop implementation", is the current DB48X simulator close to what you have in mind, or are you thinking about something more like a library? Or maybe a command-line interface? Or simply building and distributing Windows binaries? I'm asking notably because of the NumPy reference.

Yes about a CLI version (maybe even with a nice IDE :) just like for other interactive programming languages (e.g., Forth, Basic, etc). It seems to me that every programming language is deserving of at least one ANSI-like implementation.

(10-01-2024 10:07 PM)c3d Wrote:  2) I'm a bit confused by the combination of "No CS degree" and "alternative to NumPy" :-)

I've seen one or two old RPL implementations of the type I wish for (i.e., without a calculator screen), but they were designed mainly for non-Windows machines. I would probably need a CS degree to get them to run on Windows :)

A calculator-free desktop RPL implementation could be an alternative to NumPy for scientific calculations. I use NumPy but would prefer an option of writing some scientific software in RPL. However, I probably represent a customer base of 1 :)

(10-01-2024 10:07 PM)c3d Wrote:  ...while RPL design is remarkable, it was also a somewhat messy evolution over time.

True, but by the 48g, the set of core RPL operators seemed mature, allowing operations on lists and arrays similar to APL, making RPL an array language. So the 48g operator set (and control structures) represents, to me, a "basic standard" for RPL.

Continued success with DB48X and related projects!

[rprosperi]

(10-01-2024 09:40 PM)c3d Wrote:  [snip

I'll try to represent them fairly, but I do not speak for them, this comment is only based on earlier discussions with them.

First, SwissMicros does something which is very smart, which is to focus on a specific niche market. Their current niche is HP calculator enthusiasts, and the way they approach it is by building calculators that faithfully emulate existing HP models. While they can improve slightly, e.g. with larger and better screens, running faster, showing multiple stack levels, or including a built-in help viewer, the basic rule is that the existing HP manuals should apply just as well to the corresponding DM model. This goes all the way down to exact placement key and labelling, or simulating printing.

They only deviated once from this philosophy, and I believe they see that as a disaster. They worked with the WP43 team to try and bring a non-HP calculator, albeit one that was clearly "in the spirit of" RPN calculators. Prototypes of the calculator were built, but then there was a dispute. I was not part of that dispute, so I can only report hearsay, but my understanding is that the creator of the WP43 project and the SwissMicros team could not come to an agreement regarding who would own the really impressive user manual. In any case, my impression is that SwissMicros derived all the wrong lessons from that, namely that working with an "external R&D department" was dangerous, and that they'd better stick to the known evils of existing HP calculators.
[snip]

Your speculation on what happened is just that, speculation, and is based on incomplete information, much of which isn't public. Please feel free to share your own opinions and conclusions here, but don't try to represent others actions and/or conclusions as that usually, as it does here, misleads people to believe things that are not so.

Regarding model naming, prefix letters, etc. there are cases to be made for and against all of the choices mentioned above, and all are as valid or invalid as various opinions about them are.

A related observation is the C47 project, which uses nomenclature completely unrelated to any prior model or series, currently likely has more users than all other 3rd-party projects combined, so the name itself is clearly not the key criteria.

[HP67]

I thought the 48 ROMs were officially legally fine to use.

If so, I think a hardware clone of a 48GX would sell well, even if we had to flash the ROM upon arrival. I have no idea who all SwissMicro sells to, but if this forum represents the bulk of their market, then clearly, we are all fine with flashing this or that.

I have bought 5 or 6 SwissMicro calcs over the year, I have 3 (I think) and I gave 3 as gifts. They have proven they can deliver a quality product that is worth buying. In some ways (the titanium cases) they outdid HP. I'd like double shot keys on any future model though.

Until now they haven't given me a chance to buy a clone of my favorites (48GX, 50g). If the time comes, I would spend the money. But, it has to be 100% compatible. The I/O on the 48 and 50 is already good enough for me. I'd like a physical card slot like on a real 50g, since the internal memory is sufficient for me and a card only requires power when used.

I would not be interested in a new oddball variant based HP calcs. I think HP really nailed the UI as no other calculator company has done. For me that's part of why I prefer their calcluators over anything else that I have used.

[c3d]

(10-02-2024 02:14 AM)rprosperi Wrote:  

(10-01-2024 09:40 PM)c3d Wrote:  [snip

I'll try to represent them fairly, but I do not speak for them, this comment is only based on earlier discussions with them.

First, SwissMicros does something which is very smart, which is to focus on a specific niche market. Their current niche is HP calculator enthusiasts, and the way they approach it is by building calculators that faithfully emulate existing HP models. While they can improve slightly, e.g. with larger and better screens, running faster, showing multiple stack levels, or including a built-in help viewer, the basic rule is that the existing HP manuals should apply just as well to the corresponding DM model. This goes all the way down to exact placement key and labelling, or simulating printing.

They only deviated once from this philosophy, and I believe they see that as a disaster. They worked with the WP43 team to try and bring a non-HP calculator, albeit one that was clearly "in the spirit of" RPN calculators. Prototypes of the calculator were built, but then there was a dispute. I was not part of that dispute, so I can only report hearsay, but my understanding is that the creator of the WP43 project and the SwissMicros team could not come to an agreement regarding who would own the really impressive user manual. In any case, my impression is that SwissMicros derived all the wrong lessons from that, namely that working with an "external R&D department" was dangerous, and that they'd better stick to the known evils of existing HP calculators.
[snip]

Your speculation on what happened is just that, speculation, and is based on incomplete information, much of which isn't public. Please feel free to share your own opinions and conclusions here, but don't try to represent others actions and/or conclusions as that usually, as it does here, misleads people to believe things that are not so.

I believe I made it clear what was hearsay.

What is not speculation is my own interactions with SwissMicros, which have been somewhat bruising.

It is not speculation that the initial reaction was enthusiastic, and that I got the cold shoulder 6 months later. It is not speculation that this change of heart immediately followed the WP43 fallout, nor is it speculation that Michael directly referred to these events as the reason SwissMicros wanted to have full control over their software. It is not speculation that Michael told me that I should have asked for one more row of keys as an excuse, when even much simpler asks had all been repeatedly rejected. It is not speculation that Michael told me they wanted perfect compatibility and were not interested in something that was not faithful to the corresponding HP model. It is not speculation that I mentioned Numworks repeatedly to Michael to show there was a path to success through innovation, only to be accused of "threatening" SwissMicros by some third party who Michael had forwarded my private e-mail to. It is not speculation that I held back on releasing an iOS app that had been working for more than a year because I wanted to give SwissMicros a chance to be the first commercial release of DB48x.

In short, I am the very best person to have an opinion on why SwissMicros does not offer DB48x as an option. I was at the center of these discussions, no one else, and I have the emails to remind me of how painful this was.

Quote:Regarding model naming, prefix letters, etc. there are cases to be made for and against all of the choices mentioned above, and all are as valid or invalid as various opinions about them are.

A related observation is the C47 project, which uses nomenclature completely unrelated to any prior model or series, currently likely has more users than all other 3rd-party projects combined, so the name itself is clearly not the key criteria.

This project has a very long history, though. As you certainly know, the lineage is:

• WP34S, based on HP hardware, and where the naming convention was a reference to the HP32, skipping HP33 that already existed, and where WP were the initials of the designers (Walter Bonin and Paul Dale), much like HP or DM.
• WP43, designed for SwissMicros hardware, which I would argue was a reference to HP42.
• C43 was a friendly fork that mostly changed the key layout for compatibility, hence the "C".
• C47 was a renaming of C43 with changes in the user interface that were more than skin deep. By the time this name finally appeared, years later, there was an installed base already.
  

So the argument that the name does not matter seems to be ignoring quite a bit of context. I actually wonder if "the C47 project [...] currently likely has more users than all other 3rd-party projects combined" remains true if you take the iOS version of DB48x into account. After all, the main DB48x discussion thread is in the top-10 on this forum in number of responses (320 responses), aka user engagement, and the only active one in the top-10 (i.e. with responses within the last 6 months), with 4874 additional views in the past 8 days.

Regarding naming conventions, DB48x follows more or less the same established logic used by DM42 or WP43S, except that:

• I chose DB for Dave and Bill to honour Dave Packard and Bill Hewlett, instead of using my own initials.
• I used 48 and 50 instead of 51 because the intent is to be source compatible with these models. One can argue that I should have used DB51X and DB52X, but I don't regret the choice, because here too I want to pay homage to the original design.
  

Ultimately, I am the one choosing the name for the project ;-) and the question in this thread is specifically about whether there would be an interest in a DM42n with DB48x key layout at the factory and officially released binaries preinstalled, which, apart from "doing nothing", is genuinely the smallest effort I can think of on the part of SwissMicros. Discussions about the name are bike shedding ;-)

[c3d]

(10-02-2024 08:41 AM)HP67 Wrote:  I thought the 48 ROMs were officially legally fine to use.

If so, I think a hardware clone of a 48GX would sell well, even if we had to flash the ROM upon arrival. I have no idea who all SwissMicro sells to, but if this forum represents the bulk of their market, then clearly, we are all fine with flashing this or that.

I have bought 5 or 6 SwissMicro calcs over the year, I have 3 (I think) and I gave 3 as gifts. They have proven they can deliver a quality product that is worth buying. In some ways (the titanium cases) they outdid HP. I'd like double shot keys on any future model though.

Until now they haven't given me a chance to buy a clone of my favorites (48GX, 50g). If the time comes, I would spend the money. But, it has to be 100% compatible. The I/O on the 48 and 50 is already good enough for me. I'd like a physical card slot like on a real 50g, since the internal memory is sufficient for me and a card only requires power when used.

I would not be interested in a new oddball variant based HP calcs. I think HP really nailed the UI as no other calculator company has done. For me that's part of why I prefer their calcluators over anything else that I have used.

I wonder if you have used DB48X? If so, what makes it "oddball" to you (expect for having to fit on an HP42 keyboard)? This is a community project, so what you don't like can be fixed.

Regarding the UI, yes HP nailed it sometimes, although they had gaffes too (the placement of the ENTER key on the HP50G being a big one). It does not mean that you cannot improve on what they did when you have better hardware. Here is a testimony from this thread.

Linus_Sch post_id=33385 time=1725534360 user_id=5296 Wrote:I've poked a bit at the web version and I've got to say this: the way shifts now create 18-item menu pages in top level menus is a bit of a gamechanger. Moreso than I thought. To me, probably, the largest step forward in calculators since 28s introduced directories to RPL... rivalled only by the screen of the SwissMicros flagships. I think the credit for the 18-item menu pages goes to the WP43 project, but applying it to RPL deserves acknowledgement in its own right. Well done Christophe!

[raprism]

Eventually the headline should have been "Gauging interest in a DM48x or DM50x?". and telling people that x is extra. In the end there is also Plus42, i.e. still with 42.

I'm glad that not old ROM behaviour was taken over to get full binary compatibility. I don't need the old Lemmings - I would take a new one ;-)

In the end SwissMicros profits, if db48x (or db50x) is used on some devices.

[c3d]

(10-02-2024 12:00 PM)raprism Wrote:  Eventually the headline should have been "Gauging interest in a DM48x or DM50x?". and telling people that x is extra. In the end there is also Plus42, i.e. still with 42.

I'm glad that not old ROM behaviour was taken over to get full binary compatibility. I don't need the old Lemmings - I would take a new one ;-)

In the end SwissMicros profits, if db48x (or db50x) is used on some devices.

My thoughts exactly.

[c3d]

(10-02-2024 12:00 PM)raprism Wrote:  Eventually the headline should have been "Gauging interest in a DM48x or DM50x?". and telling people that x is extra. In the end there is also Plus42, i.e. still with 42.

I posted a copy of this poll on the SwissMicros forum, taking your feedback into account.

[johanw]

I remember a remark about a quirk in US copyright law that allowed SM to use the ROM images older than a certain age. The DM42 was possible because Thomas has rewritten his simulator from scratch without using a HP ROM. But using a HP48 or 50 ROM would create possible problems. Although HP might turn a blind eye for a hobbyist project that is distributed for free that would be different for a commercial company selling those units.