Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

CY-CL · 12-04-2017, 05:36 PM

I hope to order one this week. Christmas is near...

Thomas Okken · 12-04-2017, 11:00 PM

(12-04-2017 03:15 PM)Michael de Estrada Wrote:
(12-04-2017 06:28 AM)Thomas Okken Wrote: To put this in perspective: when HP released their first handheld calculator, the HP-35, in 1972, they charged $395 for it. In 2017 dollars, that's roughly $2300. How much did you spend on your latest brand-new calculator?

That is a false equivalency. All electronics were far more expensive back then. My first color TV that I bought in 1972 would cost over $10K in today’s inflated dollars. The same could be said of my first Tandy microcomputer. When I bought my HP 35 in 1973, the price had just dropped to $295, but that still represented two weeks of my take home pay.

Higher prices mean higher margins.

(12-04-2017 03:15 PM)Michael de Estrada Wrote: As production costs came down, so did the prices of HP calculators, yet HP still managed to maintain high quality standards until the company lost its way in the new millenium. Meanwhile, companies like Apple still manage to maintain high quality standards, while remaining competitive.

Apples and oranges (no pun intended). Apple sells high-end smartphones. I paid $600 for mine three years ago, and it was the bottom-of-the-line model. But for that kind of cash, you expect a blazingly-fast CPU, lots of RAM and flash, cellular and WiFi and whatnot, and all that in a package that is sturdy enough to be carried in a jeans pocket every day, even with no protective case.

And what about calculators? If enough people were still interested in buying something like the 50g, I'm sure HP would be happy to keep making them, just like they're still making the 12C. But while smartphones are an extremely popular product with high margins, calculators are a shrinking, low-margin market. I don't find it surprising that HP calculator quality isn't what it used to be, I'm more surprised that they haven't abandoned that market altogether.

zeno333 · 12-05-2017, 12:25 AM

(12-04-2017 11:00 PM)Thomas Okken Wrote:
(12-04-2017 03:15 PM)Michael de Estrada Wrote: That is a false equivalency. All electronics were far more expensive back then. My first color TV that I bought in 1972 would cost over $10K in today’s inflated dollars. The same could be said of my first Tandy microcomputer. When I bought my HP 35 in 1973, the price had just dropped to $295, but that still represented two weeks of my take home pay.

Higher prices mean higher margins.

(12-04-2017 03:15 PM)Michael de Estrada Wrote: As production costs came down, so did the prices of HP calculators, yet HP still managed to maintain high quality standards until the company lost its way in the new millenium. Meanwhile, companies like Apple still manage to maintain high quality standards, while remaining competitive.

Apples and oranges (no pun intended). Apple sells high-end smartphones. I paid $600 for mine three years ago, and it was the bottom-of-the-line model. But for that kind of cash, you expect a blazingly-fast CPU, lots of RAM and flash, cellular and WiFi and whatnot, and all that in a package that is sturdy enough to be carried in a jeans pocket every day, even with no protective case.

And what about calculators? If enough people were still interested in buying something like the 50g, I'm sure HP would be happy to keep making them, just like they're still making the 12C. But while smartphones are an extremely popular product with high margins, calculators are a shrinking, low-margin market. I don't find it surprising that HP calculator quality isn't what it used to be, I'm more surprised that they haven't abandoned that market altogether.

My point was that at one time HP used high quality inlaid keys on one of their lowest priced calculators, the 20S..they then decided to stop doing that...I got a older manual that still said it had that feature with the new model that did not have that feature...they were to cheap to even correct the manual...Their dropping that feature on a low end model was very much a mindset issue as opposed to a cost issue since it was regarding their lower end model. You had made a point that they used to coast lots more than today, well the 20S was a low cost model and it had the better keys at the beginning, then that changed...what changed was HPs unique caring about quality, that is my point.

Thomas Okken · 12-05-2017, 02:31 AM

(12-05-2017 12:25 AM)zeno333 Wrote: My point was that at one time HP used high quality inlaid keys on one of their lowest priced calculators, the 20S..they then decided to stop doing that...I got a older manual that still said it had that feature with the new model that did not have that feature...they were to cheap to even correct the manual...Their dropping that feature on a low end model was very much a mindset issue as opposed to a cost issue since it was regarding their lower end model. You had made a point that they used to coast lots more than today, well the 20S was a low cost model and it had the better keys at the beginning, then that changed...what changed was HPs unique caring about quality, that is my point.

Replacing injection-molded keys with cheaper, painted ones reduces the cost of making a calculator by some amount of money, which is going to be the roughly same regardless of how fancy or cheap that calculator is in all other respects. It will shave off the same amount from the cost of making a 50g or 48GX as from the cost of making a 20S.

But the profit margin on a 20S is much lower, so the effect of building it more cheaply is much greater.

HP was capable of "uniquely caring" about quality as long as there were enough people willing to pay the high prices of their products, instead of buying the much more affordable TIs or Casios or Sharps. And that's not the case any more. The market for high-quality, and thus high-price calculators is all but gone. If anyone's mind-set has changed, it's not HP's, it's their customers'.

**rprosperi** · 12-05-2017, 02:31 AM

(12-05-2017 02:08 AM)emersone12 Wrote: It would be an almost certainty that after Swiss Micros releases their portrait DM42 by the "end of November" then logical thinking would suggest that their next model to follow will be a portrait version DM41P to match the format of the original legendary HP-41CX. A mini-micro size version of the DM42 would also be desirable & maybe a possibility as another project for Swiss Micros to expand their existing range of available models.

The DM42 was feasible due to access to the excellent and flexible Free42 code; although it had to be modified for the larger screen (and other enhancements) it is available, written in a modern language and has been ported to many platforms and thus has mature portability. Making a DM41P would require manually porting the Nut MCODE OS; even if emulated in a modern processor for speed, the OS would require extensive changes to support the larger screen, larger keyboard, etc.

I think the DM41 is close enough.

Massimo Gnerucci · 12-05-2017, 08:01 AM

(12-05-2017 02:31 AM)rprosperi Wrote: I think the DM41 is close enough.

Nope, it's simply wrong.

grsbanks · 12-05-2017, 08:23 AM

(12-05-2017 02:08 AM)emersone12 Wrote: It would be an almost certainty that after Swiss Micros releases their portrait DM42 by the "end of November" then logical thinking would suggest that their next model to follow will be a portrait version DM41P to match the format of the original legendary HP-41CX. A mini-micro size version of the DM42 would also be desirable & maybe a possibility as another project for Swiss Micros to expand their existing range of available models.

The delay is down to a delayed shipment. The parts have arrived and Michael is assembling finished DM42s as we "speak". It won't be long now Smile

As far as I know there are no plans to make a DM41P. There are, however, plans to release a DM42L in a case similar to the existing DMxxL machines but with a smaller, 2-line screen.

CY-CL · 12-05-2017, 10:22 AM

Quote:As far as I know there are no plans to make a DM41P...

We discussed a HP41CX on the base from a DM42 at the Swiss Meeting last year. Swissmicros was not averse to build a HP41CX. For sure it depends how many they could sell. If such a project comes reality I would buy two of them.

Massimo Gnerucci · 12-05-2017, 12:50 PM

(12-05-2017 10:22 AM)CY-CL Wrote:
Quote:As far as I know there are no plans to make a DM41P...

We discussed a HP41CX on the base from a DM42 at the Swiss Meeting last year. Swissmicros was not averse to build a HP41CX. For sure it depends how many they could sell. If such a project comes reality I would buy two of them.

And Michael confirmed me a couple of times that the DM41P could be a possibility after DM42 release.

Dave Britten · 12-05-2017, 02:33 PM

I'd be fine with a 41L+ that simply uses a micro controller with more storage to allow for loading module ROMs. Could even sell it as an upgrade kit, i.e. board only that you install in your existing unit.

grsbanks · 12-05-2017, 02:50 PM

(12-05-2017 02:33 PM)Dave Britten Wrote: a micro controller with more storage to allow for loading module ROMs.

That would actually be pretty cool. Just load the ROM images into an area of the flash memory accessible as a USB drive (just like the DM42 now) to wedge them into the '41. I like that idea Smile

**rprosperi** · 12-05-2017, 05:18 PM

(12-05-2017 08:01 AM)Massimo Gnerucci Wrote: Nope, it's simply wrong.

Don't misunderstand me, I agree a landscape 41 is heresy (as well as confusing), my only point, that wasn't made too well I guess, is it's hard to believe there is enough demand for a 41 in a DM42 body to justify the large software porting effort. I'd love to wrong, as I'd love one of these as well. Let's see what happens...

CY-CL · 12-05-2017, 06:02 PM

Fact is, a 41 is 1000 times more popular as a 42.

**rprosperi** · 12-05-2017, 06:50 PM

(12-05-2017 06:02 PM)CY-CL Wrote: Fact is, a 41 is 1000 times more popular as a 42.

While not wrong, I'm not confidant such statements are enough for Michael to be make a reliable business justification.

And while there likely were 1000 times more 41s sold than 42s, I'd guess there are more 42s still being used today. As for market demand, really hard to gauge... though a pure 41 in DM42 case/LCD would have huge appeal if they could pull off real compatibility with things like synthetics and some means to install ROMs internally. Yeah, as I said, I do want one...

Luigi Vampa · (This post was last modified: 12-05-2017 08:32 PM by Luigi Vampa.)

The popularity of HPXX vs. HPYY has been discussed 'ad infinitum et nauseam' in this forum. You just need to go around to find supporters of your model of choice.
Anyway, that 'HHCPR' (handheld calculator popularity ratio) does seem somewhat subjective to me ;O)

EDIT:
Sorry, I couldn't resist anymore...
Google "HP 42 calculator" = 2.470.000 results
Google "HP 41 calculator" = 1.990.000 results
And hence, my own and subjective HHCPR = 24%

Luigi Vampa · 12-05-2017, 09:20 PM

Definetely.
BTW, my father suffered from lung cancer; he died when I was just two years old. Stupid habit!

hth · 12-05-2017, 09:50 PM

(12-05-2017 06:57 PM)Luigi Vampa Wrote: EDIT:
Sorry, I couldn't resist anymore...
Google "HP 42 calculator" = 2.470.000 results
Google "HP 41 calculator" = 1.990.000 results
And hence, my own and subjective HHCPR = 24%

Try Google HP-41 = about 85,800,000 hits
Try Google HP-42 = about 7,110,000 hits

HP-41 is way more popular.

Håkan

pier4r · (This post was last modified: 12-05-2017 10:00 PM by pier4r.)

(12-05-2017 09:10 PM)emersone12 Wrote: Google "Lung Cancer" = 60,400,000 results, so it must be more popular than both the "HP 42 calculator" + "HP 41 calculator" by 1254%

In terms of interest and people that talk about it (therefore generating internet content), sure. Indeed you googled lung cancer and not, say, rundeck, for a reason.

edit:
on google site:hpmuseum.org <string>
"hp 41": About 7'270 results
"hp 42 OR free42": about 6'090 res
"wp 34": ~ 1'510 res
"hp 50": ~ 9'460 res
"hp 48": ~ 8'860 res
"hp 35" (35 and 35s): ~ 3.820
"hp prime" : ~ 5'840

note that google can group similar namings like 34, 34s or 41c, 41cv etc...

Massimo Gnerucci · 12-05-2017, 10:23 PM

(12-05-2017 09:50 PM)pier4r Wrote:
(12-05-2017 09:10 PM)emersone12 Wrote: Google "Lung Cancer" = 60,400,000 results, so it must be more popular than both the "HP 42 calculator" + "HP 41 calculator" by 1254%

In terms of interest and people that talk about it (therefore generating internet content), sure. Indeed you googled lung cancer and not, say, rundeck, for a reason.

edit:
on google site:hpmuseum.org <string>
"hp 41": About 7'270 results
"hp 42 OR free42": about 6'090 res
"wp 34": ~ 1'510 res
"hp 50": ~ 9'460 res
"hp 48": ~ 8'860 res
"hp 35" (35 and 35s): ~ 3.820
"hp prime" : ~ 5'840

note that google can group similar namings like 34, 34s or 41c, 41cv etc...

site:hpmuseum.org 41c 8770
site:hpmuseum.org 50g 3950

Luigi Vampa · 12-05-2017, 10:25 PM

(12-05-2017 09:50 PM)hth Wrote:
(12-05-2017 06:57 PM)Luigi Vampa Wrote: EDIT:
Sorry, I couldn't resist anymore...
Google "HP 42 calculator" = 2.470.000 results
Google "HP 41 calculator" = 1.990.000 results
And hence, my own and subjective HHCPR = 24%
Try Google HP-41 = about 85,800,000 hits
Try Google HP-42 = about 7,110,000 hits
HP-41 is way more popular.
Håkan

But Håkan, as a side effect you are including the popular HP 41 ink cartridge for HP color printers, and who knows what other goodies.
I prefer to quote my searches, and include the term you want to refer to: "HP XY calculator". Doing that SAME search for BOTH models seems fair to me.