CASIO Graph Lite and Graph Math+

[Csaba Tizedes]

(03-02-2024 07:03 PM)carey Wrote:  Over-hyped CW criticisms:

1.) Multi-statement removal. (...) The CW can solve the same math problems for which multi-statements were used, often more elegantly.

2.) Removal of CALC - Same functionality in CW, but organized, often with more options.

3.) Modes are still there! Some modes are interconnected in the CW (e.g., tables and functions).

4.) (...) reduce the need for relatively bulky intermediate level calculators

-----------------------------------------------------------
First of all: removing useful functions very dangerous: try to imagine an engineer when bought his first 41C. "OK, let's do some stat, there is SUM+" Type-type-type... Fine. "Do Linear Regression: Hmm... XEQ LR - NONEXISTENT, hmm, XEQ LINEAR - NONEXISTENT, ehh, XEQ SLOPE - NONEXISTENT, OK, maybe XEQ RGRSSN (o.O) NONEXISTENT, damn..." RTFM (0.0) there is SUM+ SUM- MEAN SD SUMX SUMY, etc, but NO L.R.?!?!?!?!? That was me. And thats why I traded all my 41C/41CX with tape, video modulator, printer, etc for a 200LX + 95LX, because this level of stupidism kill my mind.

So, your points:

1.) If you can implement this Bisection method on CW, you're a magician (yes, my favourite and most complex example). Multi statement was the only possibility to implement complex calculations without programming: Bisection method on fx-991CEX using CALC (IF~THEN~ELSE structure without IF)

2.) CALC is the most important tool, if you want to make step-by-step calculations repetitively if you want to choose input values by yourself, eg. check this example of iterative solution of calculating settling velocity of gold particles: Settling velocity on fx-991CEX using CALC

3.) MODEs are focusing on differences of data types and not on similarity. Try to imagine a HP48SX or GX with MODEs. You will throw them to the wall. A matrix and a real number same if you want to make an addition. There are rules, of course, but the calculator can handle and that is why error trap and error messages there are. If you think MODE is a great thing, solve a linear equation system with complex matrices on CASIO (basic electrical engineering problem). When you enter into Matrix mode, the complex numbers are gone. If you enter into Complex mode, matrices are gone. BUT: you can solve eg. a 2x2 system in Complex mode with Cramer rule with complex variables. Stupidism at max level.

4.) You never hold in your hand a TI-84 Python edition (yes, that France version). Thin, elegant, small.


If you think the CASIO did a good job with CW:
- show me, how you can implement a CALC (my examples above)
- show me, how you can implement a multistatement "more elegantly" as you wrote
- you like the new SOLVE with f(x) and g(x)? Type in an equation into f(x), eg. f(x)=A+x, then jump to SOLVE, type in f(x)=0 and SOLVE for A, if x=5.

Grab ANY CASIO graphing (NOT ClassPad) and
- make a differentiation by any variable which is not X - why those lots of implemented functions are if they are useless? Hint, you can check: grab a TI-30X/36X Pro (the old one is good enough), set Classic mode in Setup and you can differentiate by ANY variable (not only X). On the most powerful CASIOs below ClassPad there is only! d/dx(). How you will calculate propagation of uncerteanity? Directional derivative?
- same for integration....

... and lots of similar "glitches" makes CASIOs the greatest "meh".