(06-06-2022 10:30 PM)LinusSch Wrote: The DM32 and the discussion caused me to think.
I work in front of a computer or two. If a calculation requires programming I generally do it in the computer, in the language that I'm already working in. If I'm looking for a simple unit conversion I have a good utility for that in the computer and if it is something more complicated involving units I most definitely want RPL. But rather often I want a really simple calculator, separate from the computer. Scientific but without all the advanced stuff. And we were discussing menus and busy faceplates and the problem that we just don't remember where everything is... so I decided to do an experiment.
How well does all the basic scientific functionality fit on the relatively large number of keys on the DM portrait platform - with no shifts and no menus (other than display and modes)? Result: it fits very well, for me at least, that never makes use of the % and %change functionality. Take a look at the attached pdf and tell me what you think.
I realize that it is somewhat silly to use such a powerful platform for a calculator this simple, and that it won't actually be easy to use unless we can at some point maybe get this hardware with mostly blank keys. But, this being a non-programmable calculator, it may actually be easy enough to create that I might go ahead and do it anyway at some point.
I also had another insight: the menus on the 32s ii are really fast and easy due to 1) no submenus and 2) no more than 6 items, therefore no scrolling of menus. Why not base the entire calculator around that? I'm in the process of developing that idea, it could include a whole lot more functions while still making it really easy to find everything.
Or maybe I'm just crazy right now.
I like keyboard 2 and it's very simple and meets the need. If you want, you could add a new row to include hyperbolic functions, conversions (but that would break the no-menu rule), combination, permutation.