Your First Handheld?

[Mike Morrow]

(05-13-2014 12:34 AM)Dave Britten Wrote:  But my goodness was that ever a horrible battery compartment design on those clamshells.

The Spice battery compartment was little better, and the Classic battery compartment cover is only slightly better yet...way over-complicated. The Woodstock battery/door assembly is one of the best HP ever managed to design...but then they ruined it with the self-destructing battery charging system...very very incompetent design!!!

It always amazes me when the first ten years of HP calculator design is held up as some sort of golden age. Whenever I hear or read of such an outlook, I'm pretty sure the person stating it has no real knowledge of HP calculator history...at least, as one who actually used them in contemporary times.

[Mike Morrow]

(05-13-2014 12:50 AM)Matt Agajanian Wrote:  ...for practical purposes, especially with RPL programming, 2K was much too meager and measly.

I bought the 28C in 1986, and the 28S in 1988. The HP 28C was a fraud perpetrated on the HP customer. It was marketed well before it was actually ready to be released...which was 1988.

[Marc van Lemmen]

My first calculator was a Litronix 2290 programmable. ( 1976?) According to some internet sites the least functional programmable calculator ever made.

The first calculator I bought myself was a TI-57 in 1979, followed by a Casio FX-602P a few years later.

[Howard Owen]

(05-08-2014 02:26 PM)cutterjohn Wrote:  When I was in grade school I think that I had some TI calculator, which had red 7 segment display(I think).

Might have been a TI-30. Several of those (and the TI-30 LCD) were my first calculators from 1979 through 1982. They kept breaking, giving me a life-long bias against Texas Instruments. In 1982 I bought an HP-41C and never looked back.

[John R]

(05-13-2014 03:54 AM)Mike Morrow Wrote:  It always amazes me when the first ten years of HP calculator design is held up as some sort of golden age. Whenever I hear or read of such an outlook, I'm pretty sure the person stating it has no real knowledge of HP calculator history...at least, as one who actually used them in contemporary times.

In HP calculators, as in other areas, it seems that many of us have a bit of clouded judgment: we tend to look back on the first ones we encountered with often irrational reverence, while holding later releases to an unfairly higher standard. Every HP calculator line has had its strong points and weak points, but you'd never know it just by listening to the people championing or criticizing that particular line.

[walter b]

(05-13-2014 03:54 AM)Mike Morrow Wrote:  The Woodstock battery/door assembly is one of the best HP ever managed to design...but then they ruined it with the self-destructing battery charging system...very very incompetent design!!!

It always amazes me when the first ten years of HP calculator design is held up as some sort of golden age. Whenever I hear or read of such an outlook, I'm pretty sure the person stating it has no real knowledge of HP calculator history...at least, as one who actually used them in contemporary times.

Please allow me stating that I - when using a refurbished HP-25C in 1977ff on a daily basis - never experienced any problem with the batteries. I even didn't know of that charging circuit problem at that time, and why the hell should I ever remove the batteries? There simply was no reason for doing that so I did charge them inside my HP-25C all the time, of course. What I don't know, however, was the kind of repair my 25C had seen before I got it - there simply was no reason for me opening it. So I was a satisfied user for several years, and my only reasons for replacing it were the batteries turning a bit weak after some years and the Voyagers having L.R. built in.

So much about contemporary experience, just one data point though.

d:-)

[jebem]

(05-13-2014 01:16 PM)John R Wrote:  

(05-13-2014 03:54 AM)Mike Morrow Wrote:  It always amazes me when the first ten years of HP calculator design is held up as some sort of golden age. Whenever I hear or read of such an outlook, I'm pretty sure the person stating it has no real knowledge of HP calculator history...at least, as one who actually used them in contemporary times.

In HP calculators, as in other areas, it seems that many of us have a bit of clouded judgment: we tend to look back on the first ones we encountered with often irrational reverence, while holding later releases to an unfairly higher standard. Every HP calculator line has had its strong points and weak points, but you'd never know it just by listening to the people championing or criticizing that particular line.

Very true... I never saw a flawless machine, calculator or any other type, for that matter.
I believe it is in the human nature to demand perfection on the others, while overlooking our own faults.
But to be fair, and I used HP, Casio and TI in the 70's, the HP calculators from that era:

1. Had hardware built to a very high standard to last forever, when compared to Casio and TI models;
2. Had unique specific scientific, math, programming and peripheral features making them the tools for the scientist or engineer in a era where affordable professional computers didn't exist yet (mainframes were terrible expensive and only huge corporates could afford such big machines);
3. Had big price tags as a result, and for that reason many people, especially students, went for cheaper TI or even Casio machines.
   

However the math features of Casio and TI where not so diminished against HP, they are just different in the way it are used, and bugs/flaws exists in all these brands since the beginning.
In the end, yes, it is a matter of personal taste in favor of a specific brand and model, especially when it fits your current needs.

[kusmi]

My first calculator was a Casio fx 6500 - I bought it with money I got from my godmother as a birthday present - I was so fascinated by its (limited) programming features I started learning to program. I remember I did a simple game: Drew some random castles (3x3 pixel wide) on the screen and with the cursor you could navigate to them. It then asked for a number (1-10 - you had two chances, it responded if you guessed too high or low) and if you guessed it right, the princess was released :-) if not, you had to navigate to another castle.

My first HP encounter was by coincidence: On a German television show (not sure if it was called "hitec" on 3sat) - every week they asked people to send in a small text describing the functionality of certain tech-products. At that time (I was around 16) I "specialized" in participating in a lot of contests - I always choose those where I thought the chance of winning was high (e.g. those who required some effort by the participant - not just to tick a box and send it in). And this show offered exactly that: You had to write a 1-2 page text, and it was aired on a not-so-famous TV-channel.

OK then, my turn was to write how a "cardiac pacemaker" works :-) I sent it in and won the weekly price: A HP 48G calculator! I used it during my studies and felt in love with it's RPL functionality.

I studied computer science - and now I do iPhone app development. I only realized recently: I started on mobile (calculators) first - then during my studies/first-job did a lot of server development - but my heart lies on mobile. And now I'm back on mobile again (mostly phones).

I think one of the most satisfying thing on doing mobile development is: You can show your work to others very easily: Just take your calculator/phone out of your pocket. This was never possible with server-apps.

[CosmicTruth]

National Semiconductor 4640 in 1977 and it cost about 350$
a couple of years later I was going to buy a HP ...something that read magnetic cards ?? 67/97 ??... but bought a 41-c and a survey pack, it had just been released.

[Massimo Gnerucci]

(05-14-2014 02:03 PM)CosmicTruth Wrote:  National Semiconductor 4640 in 1977 and it cost about 350$
a couple of years later I was going to buy a HP71b but bought a 41-c and a survey pack, it had just been released.

There was no HP 71B until 1984... ;)

[aurelio]

(05-13-2014 01:48 PM)walter b Wrote:  

(05-13-2014 03:54 AM)Mike Morrow Wrote:  The Woodstock battery/door assembly is one of the best HP ever managed to design...but then they ruined it with the self-destructing battery charging system...very very incompetent design!!!

It always amazes me when the first ten years of HP calculator design is held up as some sort of golden age. Whenever I hear or read of such an outlook, I'm pretty sure the person stating it has no real knowledge of HP calculator history...at least, as one who actually used them in contemporary times.

Please allow me stating that I - when using a refurbished HP-25C in 1977ff on a daily basis - never experienced any problem with the batteries. I even didn't know of that charging circuit problem at that time, and why the hell should I ever remove the batteries? There simply was no reason for doing that so I did charge them inside my HP-25C all the time, of course. What I don't know, however, was the kind of repair my 25C had seen before I got it - there simply was no reason for me opening it. So I was a satisfied user for several years, and my only reasons for replacing it were the batteries turning a bit weak after some years and the Voyagers having L.R. built in.

So much about contemporary experience, just one data point though.

d:-)

+1, Walter, the only problem was the life of rechargeable batteries and the high cost of the spare ones...
There's a second complain, let me say, the connector, that I found very weak and fragile expecially now, if compared to the classical ones, that I bought several years later it's absolutely worst

the 25c is "my first love" in matter of calculator so that you can imagine my feelings when I turned it again on, twenty years later after a vinegar washing treatment and a alcaline cells adapting work

[Geoff Quickfall]

My first in 75 and still have it!



My replacement in 77, and still have it (sold it to purchase the next one and found the owner who graciously gave it back to me 20years later!!



What did I buy? My 79 41C as I could afford it for university having made money as a bush float pilot:



Which gave rise to the 41CX in 84 for my MSc research



The 41C above has become my CL of today:



My backup to the CL is a 32K 42s and 34 with IR and clock mods.



And the occasional 71b for back-backup:

[Massimo Gnerucci]

Geoff!!!

You know what Walter and me are going to ask, aren't you?

[Geoff Quickfall]

Almost done,

Working on the final chapter and appendices,

Then the hard part, registering ISBN, number reserved, paper work to go!

Cheers,

Geoff

[Massimo Gnerucci]

(05-14-2014 07:26 PM)Geoff Quickfall Wrote:  Almost done,

Working on the final chapter and appendices,

Then the hard part, registering ISBN, number reserved, paper work to go!

Cheers,

Geoff

Music to my ears!

Thanks a lot Geoff.

[walter b]

(05-14-2014 02:09 PM)Massimo Gnerucci Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 02:03 PM)CosmicTruth Wrote:  National Semiconductor 4640 in 1977 and it cost about 350$
a couple of years later I was going to buy a HP71b but bought a 41-c and a survey pack, it had just been released.

There was no HP 71B until 1984...

Where's your problem, Massimo?

d;-)

[walter b]

(05-14-2014 07:26 PM)Geoff Quickfall Wrote:  Almost done,

Working on the final chapter and appendices,

Then the hard part, registering ISBN, number reserved, paper work to go!

We keep our fingers crossed. 2014 still?

d;-)

[Massimo Gnerucci]

(05-14-2014 08:41 PM)walter b Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 02:09 PM)Massimo Gnerucci Wrote:  There was no HP 71B until 1984...

Where's your problem, Massimo?

d;-)

A couple of years later than 1977 is not yet 1984...

[walter b]

(05-14-2014 08:56 PM)Massimo Gnerucci Wrote:  A couple of years later than 1977 is not yet 1984...

Hmmh, what count a couple of years on a cosmic background?

[Massimo Gnerucci]

(05-14-2014 09:30 PM)walter b Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 08:56 PM)Massimo Gnerucci Wrote:  A couple of years later than 1977 is not yet 1984...

Hmmh, what count a couple of years on a cosmic background?

...said Walter the nitpicker...