A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout

[walter b]

Manolo Wrote:I think it's nice to have a poll about them, thank you Walter. But let's not fool us. You can't design or even choose a good layout without using it first. You should test these things for some time with emulator versions and then choose/suggest alternatives.

You're welcome. That's exactly the reason why I wrote this: http://www.hpmuseum.org/forum/thread-1100.html.

BTW, I think most forumers have some experience with scientific calculators, some even look back to quite a few decades. And - although not every thought is explained on this forum - I'm confident that most people here are capable to assess a layout based on their experience. Life isn't always 100% but some trend should be observable.

d:-)

[Jonathan Cameron]

(04-15-2014 12:41 PM)Manolo Sobrino Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 05:37 AM)Jonathan Cameron Wrote:  Here is what mine looks like (yes, the letters under the keys are partly messed up or missing):

Hey, that's not lemon yellow! we're getting somewhere visually sensible, at last!

Actually it is yellower than it appears in this picture.

-Jonathan

[Manolo Sobrino]

(04-15-2014 01:11 PM)walter b Wrote:  

Manolo Wrote:I think it's nice to have a poll about them, thank you Walter. But let's not fool us. You can't design or even choose a good layout without using it first. You should test these things for some time with emulator versions and then choose/suggest alternatives.

You're welcome. That's exactly the reason why I wrote this: http://www.hpmuseum.org/forum/thread-1100.html.

BTW, I think most forumers have some experience with scientific calculators, some even look back to quite a few decades. And - although not every thought is explained on this forum - I'm confident that most people here are capable to assess a layout based on their experience. Life isn't always 100% but some trend should be observable.

d:-)

Yes, I do have my share of that as well, scientifics beside the notebook/stack of paper, (Staedtler HB, yellow ) pencil, and computers for programming, but sometimes I question my habits. Is my experience and the force of habit shadowing my judgement? I've found that many times it is indeed. You have to think out of the box sometimes, great things might be there. If you don't question what you're used to -UIs are not an exact science, you can't prove the superiority of anything a priori- you're probably missing them. That's my whole point.

I just wanted to arrive at a layout closer to my needs while thinking about usability for the specific user cases I could think of, all this keeping in mind the philosophy of the RPN entry method, which is not the position of trigs IMO... and the WP31S functionalities/WP34S implementation characteristics draft, that's all. And it's been a lot of fun. People here should really give it a go and try to get their own.

Thank you again for the project and for keeping an open mind about it.


(edit#2: And I agree, after having thought about it a lot, I realised that there were no choices left to put x<> on x<>y and FILL on ENTER, while keeping the arrow modifier on the 4 angle keys (that's 5 keys that go together folks, they could go in a row or 1 next to 4 in a box, and that's it), that won't mean placing other catalogues on the smaller keys unless you go for b) and its permutations of (x!,%CH) and permutations within the statistics 3x2 box. It's that or scatter randomly the statistics keys. There are lots of constraints here, that's why I called this problem the Rubik in another thread.))

(edit#3: Well, starting with b) one could move all the catalogues down to the bigger keys while keeping some sense if you don't mind being a bit creative... )

[walter b]

(04-15-2014 02:40 PM)Manolo Sobrino Wrote:  edit#3: Well, starting with b) one could move all the catalogues down to the bigger keys while keeping some sense if you don't mind being a bit creative...

Feel free to do it ... I do a lot but won't do your homework.

d:-)

[Manolo Sobrino]

(04-18-2014 07:39 AM)walter b Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 02:40 PM)Manolo Sobrino Wrote:  edit#3: Well, starting with b) one could move all the catalogues down to the bigger keys while keeping some sense if you don't mind being a bit creative...

Feel free to do it ... I do a lot but won't do your homework.

d:-)

That was a rhetorical "you". Ah, the nuances of English...

, and with more poise:

'twas done... All catalogues together with POL/REC not too distant for surveyors (I like surveyors), a piece of cake.

[walter b]

OK. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I prefer the first layout over the second.

d:-)

Regarding surveyors: please note grads will not be supported by the WP 31S. Sorry.

[Manolo Sobrino]

(04-18-2014 01:42 PM)walter b Wrote:  Regarding surveyors: please note grads will not be supported by the WP 31S. Sorry.

Just a pointless remark: I think American surveyors don't really use grads, or gons as the IUPAP calls them now. This is a Continental thing that is good if you're French, fire cannons or you've realised that it makes life simpler under some circumstances. Maybe a poll for surveyors in other subforum would be interesting... .

It doesn't matter anyway.

[walter b]

Well, I took your first layout here and played the Rubik's cube once more with it:



d;-)

[Matt Agajanian]

Count me in for design B.
The function groupings are much more organised. An aside, I'm more comfortable with the base 10 logarithm function labeled LOG rather than design A's LG label.

[Manolo Sobrino]

(04-18-2014 05:01 PM)walter b Wrote:  Well, I took your first layout here and played the Rubik's cube once more with it:

Nice, although I said "I like surveyors", not "I love surveyors", and even so, that would mean too much love .

But here's an idea, forget about grouping catalogues, there's no need to be that fundamentalist about it... what about just one more rotation, for finger travel economy and the rest of us?



   

[walter b]

I don't want to have a catalog on a navigation key. Parkinson, you know ...

d:-)

[Matt Agajanian]

Hi all.

Two questions.

I presume R^ and Rv are operated by the arrow keys above the f prefix key. Right?

As with WP-34S, will an iPhone version of the 31S be available?

[walter b]

Two answers:

1. Yes.
2. No idea.
   

d:-)

[Manolo Sobrino]

(04-18-2014 05:58 PM)walter b Wrote:  I don't want to have a catalog on a navigation key. Parkinson, you know ...

d:-)

Then it's yours, I'd just move CONV to 9:



   

Or, grouping again catalogues while thinking about finger travel and that POL/REC position alternative:



   

This last one looks very classy to me, all catalogues centred (and ready for the CX version )

[walter b]

Vote!

[Matt Agajanian]

(04-18-2014 06:46 PM)walter b Wrote:  Two answers:

1. Yes.
2. No idea.
   

d:-)

Thanks for the answers. And yes, another inquiry. Now that HP's not selling the 30B (but perhaps they could be had from auction, surplus sites, etc.), what calcs are now used to provide the base for building a 31/34S?

[htom trites]

(04-18-2014 05:10 PM)Matt Agajanian Wrote:  Count me in for design B.
The function groupings are much more organised. An aside, I'm more comfortable with the base 10 logarithm function labeled LOG rather than design A's LG label.

Yes. LN LG is harder or slower to mentally resolve than LN LOG, it's the two letters vs. three letters thing.

I can see LN LOG and e^x 10^x although LN e^x and LOG 10^x puts function and inverse on the same key like Sin ASin ... which would be a tiny bit more consistent.

[Matt Agajanian]

(04-19-2014 01:33 AM)htom trites Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 05:10 PM)Matt Agajanian Wrote:  Count me in for design B.
The function groupings are much more organised. An aside, I'm more comfortable with the base 10 logarithm function labeled LOG rather than design A's LG label.

Yes. LN LG is harder or slower to mentally resolve than LN LOG, it's the two letters vs. three letters thing.

I can see LN LOG and e^x 10^x although LN e^x and LOG 10^x puts function and inverse on the same key like Sin ASin ... which would be a tiny bit more consistent.

Well, as a long-time calculator user (35+ years), I'm very accustomed to the traditional LN, LOG nomenclatures. Call me a traditionalist.

[walter b]

(04-18-2014 05:10 PM)Matt Agajanian Wrote:  I'm more comfortable with the base 10 logarithm function labeled LOG rather than design A's LG label.

Presumably. Nevertheless, we've corrected that long time bug with the WP 34S. Many people knew the notation LG for long, some didn't but accepted it. I've explained the reason here far more than once and am getting tired of repeating it. Be assured, a label LOG for the function lg(x) = log₁₀(x) will not return on our calculators. Period.

d:-I

[walter b]

(04-18-2014 09:31 PM)Matt Agajanian Wrote:  Now that HP's not selling the 30B (but perhaps they could be had from auction, surplus sites, etc.), what calcs are now used to provide the base for building a 31/34S?

If your assumpion was true that would be a good question. So far, however, no official information has reached this forum that production of the HP-30b ceased. Although I once started a thread dedicated to that topic, even no semi-official statement reached us unless I've missed something. Whoever claims the end of the HP-30b, please supply some evidence - HP's website not showing this model is not sufficient for obvious reasons.

d:-I