Why are manufacturers so reluctant to change model numbers when they add features?

[StephenG1CMZ]

I have two examples in mind.

The old Prime G1 calculators originally had a keyboard that received criticism regarding its legibility.
The keyboard was improved but for a while it was not obvious which keyboard you would get if you ordered one. The likely consequences being some consumers either delaying purchase or being unhappy with what they got. The new G2 has the improved keyboard and other improvements.

Another example is the Casio Cg50, which has been advertised in my local Whsmith as being a graphic calculator with Python. Whilst that is somewhat inaccurate (it's micropython, and it doesn't do graphing).

But the advertising (at the Point of sale in-store) has changed, and no longer mentions Python, but the model number remains Cg50.

An unwary buyer remembering last weeks advert might buy the old CG50 without Python (if they can actually buy one - it is never in stock, whether its the one with Python or the one without).

Surely the addition or omission of Python in a product should be made clearer to the end-user?

Not all of whom are as likely to study the packaging before purchase as readers of this forum would.

Myself, I am left wondering... Does the change mean someone complained its not Python but the product is unchanged? Are they selling old stock without Python? Or has Python been removed from the Cg50 because of a problem?
It would be so much clearer if the Python version had its own model number, instead of having to guess what the calculator can do.

[Paul Dale]

My guess would be that these anomalies are related to certification. It is faster and easier to maintain the same model number than it is to certify a new model.

Pauli

[toml_12953]

(11-03-2019 07:38 AM)StephenG1CMZ Wrote:  I have two examples in mind.

The old Prime G1 calculators originally had a keyboard that received criticism regarding its legibility.
The keyboard was improved but for a while it was not obvious which keyboard you would get if you ordered one. The likely consequences being some consumers either delaying purchase or being unhappy with what they got. The new G2 has the improved keyboard and other improvements.

Another example is the Casio Cg50, which has been advertised in my local Whsmith as being a graphic calculator with Python. Whilst that is somewhat inaccurate (it's micropython, and it doesn't do graphing).

But the advertising (at the Point of sale in-store) has changed, and no longer mentions Python, but the model number remains Cg50.

An unwary buyer remembering last weeks advert might buy the old CG50 without Python (if they can actually buy one - it is never in stock, whether its the one with Python or the one without).

Surely the addition or omission of Python in a product should be made clearer to the end-user?

Not all of whom are as likely to study the packaging before purchase as readers of this forum would.

Myself, I am left wondering... Does the change mean someone complained its not Python but the product is unchanged? Are they selling old stock without Python? Or has Python been removed from the Cg50 because of a problem?
It would be so much clearer if the Python version had its own model number, instead of having to guess what the calculator can do.

For the fx-CG50, MicroPython is a feature of the OS, not the calculator. If you have an fx-CG50, you can update it to OS 3.30 and you'll have MicroPython even if it wasn't included with the calculator. Mine came with OS 3.10 which didn't have it but the first thing I did was to update the OS to 3.30 and now I have it. Anyone who buys an fx-CG50 can have MicroPython but it's possible your local dealer doesn't know that and wants to be accurate in describing what comes with the calculator as shipped.

[Dave Britten]

(11-03-2019 09:31 AM)Paul Dale Wrote:  My guess would be that these anomalies are related to certification. It is faster and easier to maintain the same model number than it is to certify a new model.

Pauli

I believe Tim specifically confirmed that when the G2 was in the works. If it's the "same" calculator, no need to recertify.

Casio is the worst offender here, but often in the entirely opposite direction - they also have tons of different model numbers for what is effectively the same thing.

For example, the fx-991ES, fx-991MS, and fx-991EX are all completely different. But the fx-991EX, fx-570EX, fx-991SPX, etc. are 99% identical. And this goes way back, too: if there's any difference between the fx-7000G, fx-7000GA, fx-7000GB, and fx-7200G, I certainly can't find it.

[grsbanks]

(11-05-2019 01:42 PM)Dave Britten Wrote:  if there's any difference between the fx-7000G, fx-7000GA, fx-7000GB, and fx-7200G, I certainly can't find it.

The difference between the fx-7000G and the fx-7000GA/GB is the colour of the bezel around the LCD. Otherwise they're identical. However, I've not found a difference between the 7000GA and the 7000GB, and I didn't know there was a 7200G (probably not released in Europe?)

[Dave Britten]

(11-06-2019 06:06 AM)grsbanks Wrote:  

(11-05-2019 01:42 PM)Dave Britten Wrote:  if there's any difference between the fx-7000G, fx-7000GA, fx-7000GB, and fx-7200G, I certainly can't find it.

The difference between the fx-7000G and the fx-7000GA/GB is the colour of the bezel around the LCD. Otherwise they're identical. However, I've not found a difference between the 7000GA and the 7000GB, and I didn't know there was a 7200G (probably not released in Europe?)

I did a bit more digging on casio.ledudu.com, and supposedly the only difference is that the fx-7000GA and fx-7000GB have "predict x" and "predict y" ("x-hat" and "y-hat") functions that can be used in LR1 mode.

http://casio.ledudu.com/pockets.asp?type=95&lg=eng
http://casio.ledudu.com/pockets.asp?type=175&lg=eng

The fx-7200G appears to be identical to the fx-7000G - the boxes advertise the same number of functions.

http://casio.ledudu.com/pockets.asp?type=148&lg=eng
http://casio.ledudu.com/pockets.asp?type=151&lg=eng

[foroplus]

Well, in fact, the differences between FX-7000G, GA, GB, and 7200G are more than that that you can appreciate at a simple glance like the color of the bezel or the color of the keys.

Internally, they have different motherboards and CPUs. Model 7000G and 7200G sport the chip NEC D1007G, while the GA sports the D3050G(AKA Hitachi HD62076). Though obviously that CPUs have to be very similar and almost equivalent.

Regarding power consumption, the figures are 7000G(7200G?):0.07W and 7000GA/GB:0.04W.

[KeithB]

I will bet it is the *stores* that are pushing back on model numbers. While the mfg's want as many as possible for more shelf space, the stores want as few as possible to make it easier to track, stock and inventory.

[cdmackay]

(11-06-2019 06:06 AM)grsbanks Wrote:  …and I didn't know there was a 7200G (probably not released in Europe?)

I've just picked up a cheap 7200G on eBay; but I can't immediately find my old 7000G that I got when it came out, and can't remember it quite detailed enough to tell if there are any differences