WP 34S --> WP 31S

[walter b]

(02-01-2014 03:56 AM)Gene Wrote:  Looking good. How about the order of x s r on 4 5 6 instead of s x r ?

And, perhaps DEG H .d H.MS on 1 2 3 and RAD on 0. This places H. d and H.MS next to each other on the same row and DEG RAD right above each other.

I know this is an endless subjective matter, but for your consideration.

Answering in RPN-style (i.e. bottom up):

You can say that!

Can be done.

Did you notice "s" is placed above "S"? I prefer to keep it this way.

d:-)

[Jonathan Cameron]

(02-01-2014 09:02 AM)walter b Wrote:  ? Some answers (feel free to pick one or more ):

I understand these concerns, but I was trying to understand when the person using this calculator layout would actually need to know the letters. For STO/RCL?

-Jonathan

[walter b]

(02-01-2014 09:08 AM)Jonathan Cameron Wrote:  ... I was trying to understand when the person using this calculator layout would actually need to know the letters. For STO/RCL?

Yes, for example (concerning A, B, C, D, I, J, K, L, T, X, Y, Z). And for catalog navigation (almost all of them, also think of CONST).

d:-)

[Jonathan Cameron]

(02-01-2014 09:12 AM)walter b Wrote:  Yes, for example (concerning A, B, C, D, I, J, K, L, T, X, Y, Z). And for catalog navigation (almost all of them, also think of CONST).

Thanks. I had not thought of the navigation issue. Having only the letters under the keys and ON on the background piece will still be a lot less cluttered. I had hoped to skip the background piece entirely, but I can see that we need it know.

By the way, I was looking at the list of items under MORE. I suggest adding FP, IP, and I suppose RMDIR (since it was banished from the keys). I can think of times when FP and IP would be very useful for day-to-day calculations.

Thanks for your interest in this and patience with my comments!

-Jonathan

[Jonathan Cameron]

Once there is consensus on the "WP 31S" concept and layout, what is next to get it to "production"?

-Jonathan

[walter b]

(02-01-2014 09:27 AM)Jonathan Cameron Wrote:  By the way, I was looking at the list of items under MORE. I suggest adding FP, IP, and I suppose RMDIR (since it was banished from the keys). I can think of times when FP and IP would be very useful for day-to-day calculations.

Added FP, IP, RMDR, and MOD and PRIME? though I think you will be faster e.g. subtracting the integer part manually than calling FP from MORE in real life. But the space is for free here, so it only costs a smile. All aboard now?

d;-)

[walter b]

(02-01-2014 09:29 AM)Jonathan Cameron Wrote:  Once there is consensus on the "WP 31S" concept and layout, what is next to get it to "production"?

A friendly person has to be found to do the necessary SW work for free, ERIC has to prepare the overlay file, the required number of 30bs have to be bought (1, 2, 3, ...?), and there you go.

d:-)

P.S.: Let's be more specific:

1. We changed the keyboard layout.
2. We changed two command names (E3... -> TS...).
3. We reduced the address range to only ten numbered g.p. registers.
4. There are three new catalogs (CLEAR, DISPL, and MORE).
5. We changed contents of MODE and STAT.
   

The SW modifications caused by this are of manageable size (I'd guess #3 being most difficult though it can be postponed). Since neither Pauli nor me nor Marcus asked for a WP 31S I'd suggest some other person shall take care of that. Any volunteers?

[Paul Dale]

The software all comes down to how far you want to optimise and change things. There is a lot that can be taken out of the 34S to produce the 31S. Most of this is fairly pointless but it would make for a cleaner internal design -- why get rid of complex mode without the complex prefix being present e.g.? It would save flash space but without being programmable, there isn't much point in that even.

I doubt I've got time to recode things to make it work at present or anytime in the near future. The more changes that are made, the more software rework is required.

Of course a full 128kb of flash dedicated to a non-programmable scientific calculator might be fun to try eventually.

- Pauli

[Gene]

The "letters" could be placed in the bottom corner of any key overlay so you would still only need one sticker per key, I suspect.

[David Hayden]

I agree with Pauli about HYP ACOS etc.

To me, delta%, Py,x and Cy,x could be removed. They are rarely used easy to compute by hand, although you have to worry about overflow with Py,x and Cy,x
. Maybe those two could go under the STAT menu.

If the goal is a calc that's "easier for the masses" then I'd consider fixing the number of stack levels. Although 4 is traditional, maybe 8 would be better since you can always use FILL to get the handy "replicate the top level" behavior.

Another thing to consider for cleaning up the appearance is a single MENU key that would lead to the STAT, MODE, CONST, DISPL, CLEAR and MORE menus. More keystrokes but clean and easy.

Would it be useful to have a CAT key to get the full catalog?

Personally, I think programmability is important. Even if you're just entering simple formulas. So my preference would be one MENU key, keep programmability, add a PROG menu (under the MENU key) and put the bare minimum programming keys on the keyboard - maybe just RUN, maybe RUN, LBL, GTO, GSB and RTN.

Dave

[walter b]

(02-01-2014 02:24 PM)David Hayden Wrote:  To me, delta%, Py,x and Cy,x could be removed. They are rarely used easy to compute by hand, although you have to worry about overflow with Py,x and Cy,x
.

I admire people being able to calculate Cy,x manually at Friday late afternoon. Then I suggest dropping % and x² first.

Quote:If the goal is a calc that's "easier for the masses" then I'd consider fixing the number of stack levels. Although 4 is traditional, maybe 8 would be better since you can always use FILL to get the handy "replicate the top level" behavior.

Agree on that (please see my earlier post). Just feared the outcry of the traditionalists.

Quote:Another thing to consider for cleaning up the appearance is a single MENU key that would lead to the STAT, MODE, CONST, DISPL, CLEAR and MORE menus. More keystrokes but clean and easy.

Would it be useful to have a CAT key to get the full catalog?

Personally, I think programmability is important. Even if you're just entering simple formulas. So my preference would be one MENU key, keep programmability, add a PROG menu (under the MENU key) and put the bare minimum programming keys on the keyboard ...

"... lift off ... we have lift off ...!" Are you still aware we're talking about a 30b-based calc with that ... display? Christmas is over. No softkeys, no menu structure ... Good grief

[walter b]

(02-01-2014 01:52 PM)Gene Wrote:  The "letters" could be placed in the bottom corner of any key overlay ...

Where?

d:-?

[Gene]

(02-01-2014 04:06 PM)walter b Wrote:  Where?
d:-?

Gene: I'm pretty sure Eric could make an overlay where the letter is placed in the lower left corner of the key overlay sticker. These could be tiny since they are not needed with anywhere near the frequency as in the 34S.

Better for this outcome than to have an entire overlay over all the keys - just a set of stickers over the keys and boom... done. IMO, of course. :-)

[Jonathan Cameron]

Walter,

(02-01-2014 09:01 AM)Jonathan Cameron Wrote:  Of course, a counter argument might go that you have to sacrfice some congruency: Either the MORE is not related to STO, or MORE is not related to X<>Y... So I think your original layout (shift-X<>Y is X<>) looks better to me. In any case it is really a pretty minor discomfort.

Ok, I retract my quibble on this. After re-reading the documentation for X<>, I realized that it is indeed just a variant of STO, so associating it with that key makes good sense.

Regarding where to put the MORE menu, I'm not wild about shift-X<>Y, but other options would require more trading around, so I'll live with it for now.

-Jonathan

[Jonathan Cameron]

(02-01-2014 10:10 AM)walter b Wrote:  A friendly person has to be found to do the necessary SW work for free, ERIC has to prepare the overlay file, the required number of 30bs have to be bought (1, 2, 3, ...?), and there you go.

Very good. I hope that this person will use an open online version control systems (such as github) for thier work so we can see it, use it to create variants, etc.

Thanks

-Jonathan

[CR Haeger]

(02-01-2014 02:24 PM)David Hayden Wrote:  I agree with Pauli about HYP ACOS etc.

To me, delta%, Py,x and Cy,x could be removed. They are rarely used easy to compute by hand, although you have to worry about overflow with Py,x and Cy,x
. Maybe those two could go under the STAT menu.

If the goal is a calc that's "easier for the masses" then I'd consider fixing the number of stack levels. Although 4 is traditional, maybe 8 would be better since you can always use FILL to get the handy "replicate the top level" behavior.

Another thing to consider for cleaning up the appearance is a single MENU key that would lead to the STAT, MODE, CONST, DISPL, CLEAR and MORE menus. More keystrokes but clean and easy.

Would it be useful to have a CAT key to get the full catalog?

Personally, I think programmability is important. Even if you're just entering simple formulas. So my preference would be one MENU key, keep programmability, add a PROG menu (under the MENU key) and put the bare minimum programming keys on the keyboard - maybe just RUN, maybe RUN, LBL, GTO, GSB and RTN.

Dave

I agree with Dave on above. I'd go for a MENU with submenus. RPN programming even with limited lines of code would be really handy. Supplying a formulas sheet to stick on the back or a hard cover would be handy as well. Finally, I would use unit conversions frequently if provided.

[Jeff O.]

(02-01-2014 06:01 PM)Gene Wrote:  Gene: I'm pretty sure Eric could make an overlay where the letter is placed in the lower left corner of the key overlay sticker. These could be tiny since they are not needed with anywhere near the frequency as in the 34S.

Better for this outcome than to have an entire overlay over all the keys - just a set of stickers over the keys and boom... done. IMO, of course. :-)

I like this idea, and it seems worth looking into. Maybe the alpha labels could even go on the top of the keys, where there is more real estate. The advantage is that all Eric would have to produce would be a set of key stickers, greatly increasing the yield from the material. The 31s would then also be distinctive, with a nifty brushed silver keyboard plane, assuming a 30b was used as the base unit (by far the best way to go, after all).

[Jonathan Cameron]

I just received 5 reconditioned HP 30b calculators (see http://www.hpmuseum.org/forum/thread-395.html). The calculators seem to be fine (keys feel okay, etc). I'm looking forward to flashing them once I get a cable figured out.

But I noticed one thing that might be relevant to the background overlay discussion: Above the 5th key on the second row, there is a legend "Black S" actually printed on the shiny front surface. So we need to hide it somehow---like with the background overlay.

-Jonathan

[Marcus von Cube]

(02-02-2014 12:30 AM)Jonathan Cameron Wrote:  Above the 5th key on the second row, there is a legend "Black S" actually printed on the shiny front surface. So we need to hide it somehow---like with the background overlay.

Put a sticker "Silver Edition" on the label?

[Massimo Gnerucci]

(02-02-2014 12:21 PM)Marcus von Cube Wrote:  Put a sticker "Silver Edition" on the label?

Good one.