DM32

[Eddie W. Shore]

It's going to be a matter of patience, something I'm not always the best at. Thank you for the update, Steve.

[johanw]

Would this mean that an upgrade for the DM42 and DM41X platforms will be coming as well? If so that will probably be even later, when the supply of socs has arrived.

[jonmoore]

(06-03-2022 12:30 PM)johanw Wrote:  Would this mean that an upgrade for the DM42 and DM41X platforms will be coming as well? If so that will probably be even later, when the supply of socs has arrived.

I've been happy with my beta 41x (after some manual tweaks to the keyboard), but an upgraded version with the new processor would definitely tempt me to update to the newer model. As for the 42, I'm happy with it as things stand, but if a version were made available, based on Plus42, I'd be happy to get both.

[Jlouis]

(06-03-2022 03:18 PM)jonmoore Wrote:  

(06-03-2022 12:30 PM)johanw Wrote:  Would this mean that an upgrade for the DM42 and DM41X platforms will be coming as well? If so that will probably be even later, when the supply of socs has arrived.

I've been happy with my beta 41x (after some manual tweaks to the keyboard), but an upgraded version with the new processor would definitely tempt me to update to the newer model. As for the 42, I'm happy with it as things stand, but if a version were made available, based on Plus42, I'd be happy to get both.

ENTER 1 +

[Steve Simpkin]

(06-03-2022 08:19 PM)Jlouis Wrote:  

(06-03-2022 03:18 PM)jonmoore Wrote:  I've been happy with my beta 41x (after some manual tweaks to the keyboard), but an upgraded version with the new processor would definitely tempt me to update to the newer model. As for the 42, I'm happy with it as things stand, but if a version were made available, based on Plus42, I'd be happy to get both.

ENTER 1 +

1 +

So far I have been barely resisting buying a DM42 but I fear I would be defenseless if SwissMicros came out with a model based on Plus42.

[Required]

So we all have another 6 months or longer to either ponder this.

[Vincent Weber]

I still don't get it.

One again, emulation is illegal (unless you leave it to the user to supply the ROM, which is weird for a physical product), and simulation is a huge work. Thomas, who is an expert, has worked for years on Free42 / Plus42. Ok, this is more complex than a 32sii but still, you need an equation parser, quite a few things, I don't see Swissmicro writing all this in such a short time...

Besides, having used Plus42 extensively, I don't want to use anything else now, as far a "simple" RPN calculators are concerned. Granted, the 32SII is a cool calc, nice to have, maybe simpler to use in some situations, but not that much: for instance even if the 32Sii has an alpha keyboard, in practice it requires 2 key strokes per letter, just like the 42, since you need to "RCL" every letter. And Plus42 has shortcuts for direct functions like RUP, X<> and %CH... Save for the fraction mode (IMHO pretty useless and limited to 4096 denominator - you are better off with an advanced fraction conversion program), there is absolutely nothing that the 32SII does that Plus42 does not do in a much better way...

I agree with the comments that the efforts should focus on making a physical Plus42. That would be really cool.

[LinusSch]

Plus42 requires an extra row of keys, same as 48/49/50 and newRPL. 48/49/50 requires Saturn emulation. To me, the DM32 is not just a logical in-between step but also a very desirable calculator - moreso than the DM42.

In my tools, whether they be for calculations or for something else, I want either simplicity or completeness. For calculators, I want either "everything has its own key" or I want my 50g. What calculators have I bought in addition to my trusty 50g? Another one, and a 32S II. (and a DM16L but that is a special purpose tool)

I did consider getting the DM42, but it really doesn't fit, for me. Now I'm considering not whether to get the DM32, but rather how many of them to get!

As for how they are able to do it... "Having an armada of HP lawyers hunting us down was the second-best option." - that does make one wonder, what was the best option? If you ask me, best option would be if they were actually somehow able to get permission from HP. This has been impossible in the past but maybe something changed? Or maybe this isn't the best option, but the third best. Maybe we will have to provide the ROM ourselves for full functionality and it comes preloaded with something considerably simpler. I REALLY don't care.

I saw the ink traps and the colors and I thought "this one I'm almost buying just for looks". Then it happens to be the 32S II, my chosen favourite of all the RPN calculators, and it's getting USB-C with an updated processor. I'm sold, probably twice.

[Thomas Okken]

(06-04-2022 08:18 AM)LinusSch Wrote:  Plus42 requires an extra row of keys, same as 48/49/50 and newRPL.

Not really. Plus42 is perfectly usable with 8 rows, or even the original HP-42S 7-row layout.

Of course it's nicer to have the additional rows, that's why I added them, but leaving them off is nothing like removing one or two rows from the HP-48/49/50 keyboards.

[Boub65]

DM42 is a very desirable calculator, very well thought, very fast, and well built... I have one.

But what some people don't get is that finding instructions deep into menus is very annoying when calculating AND programming. For example X=0? or X<Y? need something like 5 key strokes to get them, ISG/DSE 3 keystrokes...

DM32 has most of it's instructions on the keyboard (or one level menu depth) and THAT is it's differentiation for people crunching numbers or making numerous simple programs (complexity of instructions vs simplicity/speed of keying).

I will get a DM32 especially that it will have an improved hardware platform and better bezel printing.

[jonmoore]

(06-04-2022 09:04 AM)Boub65 Wrote:  .
But what some people don't get is that finding instructions deep into menus is very annoying when calculating AND programming. For example X=0? or X<Y? need something like 5 key strokes to get them, ISG/DSE 3 keystrokes...

That's a very broad assumption you're making there. The reason I don't use my 32s ii very often is that I find the physical interface and the interaction modality it enforces far too busy. The problem is compounded by the fact that I regularly hop between various calculators in my collection.

If one's using the 32s ii as their solus calculator, the lack of menu diving becomes a significant asset, but I'm not using the 32s as my solus calculator, and on that basis, each time I return to it, the busy faceplate brings on a mild form of dyscalculia!

I'm not saying that I won't purchase a DM32, but it's not something that's at the top of my wishlist.

If SM comes up with some enhancements that can take advantage of the display and processing power of the new hardware - e.g. an integrated equations library for a variety of engineering disciplines, the enticement will be greater. However, a carbon copy facsimile of the 32s ii running on fancy hardware alone doesn't have the must-own appeal of the DM42 and DM41x (for my needs). But I didn't feel the need to purchase the SM voyager models either, so I'm possibly not a typical SM customer.

[ijabbott]

(06-04-2022 06:55 AM)Vincent Weber Wrote:  I still don't get it.

One again, emulation is illegal (unless you leave it to the user to supply the ROM, which is weird for a physical product), and simulation is a huge work. Thomas, who is an expert, has worked for years on Free42 / Plus42. Ok, this is more complex than a 32sii but still, you need an equation parser, quite a few things, I don't see Swissmicro writing all this in such a short time...

Thomas managed to implement the solver in a few months, and that one is more sophisticated than the one in the 32S. So it seems doable in the time SM have been working on it (and as Michael writes, the hardware and software "still need work").

Plus42 running on an upgraded DM42 Mk.II platform sounds like a dream machine if that ever comes to fruition.

[LinusSch]

(06-04-2022 08:50 AM)Thomas Okken Wrote:  Not really. Plus42 is perfectly usable with 8 rows, or even the original HP-42S 7-row layout.

Of course it's nicer to have the additional rows, that's why I added them, but leaving them off is nothing like removing one or two rows from the HP-48/49/50 keyboards.

I stand corrected and pleasantly surprised

Quote:

Quote:But what some people don't get is that finding instructions deep into menus is very annoying when calculating AND programming. For example X=0? or X<Y? need something like 5 key strokes to get them, ISG/DSE 3 keystrokes...

That's a very broad assumption you're making there. The reason I don't use my 32s ii very often is that I find the physical interface and the interaction modality it enforces far too busy. The problem is compounded by the fact that I regularly hop between various calculators in my collection.

If one's using the 32s ii as their solus calculator, the lack of menu diving becomes a significant asset, but I'm not using the 32s (sic) as my solus calculator, and on that basis, each time I return to it, the busy faceplate brings on a mild form of dyscalculia!

Different strokes for different folks. Some of us don't want to deal with menus, some of us don't want to deal with busy faceplates, each of those being exacerbated when not using it as main or single calculator.

Sometimes I wish for a simple calculator, that would let me find all the functions it has real quickly. The 32s ii doesn't quite fit the bill, but it gets much closer than the 50g, without feeling limited unless I want units or custom menus or graphing or vectors.

[johanw]

(06-04-2022 09:04 AM)Boub65 Wrote:  But what some people don't get is that finding instructions deep into menus is very annoying when calculating AND programming. For example X=0? or X<Y? need something like 5 key strokes to get them, ISG/DSE 3 keystrokes...

DM32 has most of it's instructions on the keyboard (or one level menu depth) and THAT is it's differentiation for people crunching numbers or making numerous simple programs (complexity of instructions vs simplicity/speed of keying).

I get that, but then what is the big advantage of a DM32 over a DM15(L)? More memory would be the only thing I can come up with.

[jonmoore]

The two areas where I can think the 32s family of calculators had significant advantages over the voyager scientific's was 1.) with their quick access to a variety of conversions (but you counterbalance that advantage with a serious lack of depth with regards to its conversion capabilities when compared to the HP RPL lineup), and 2.) their algebraic equation solver offered advantages that couldn't be matched via the Voyagers. However, whilst the 32s/ii equation solver is great, it pales in comparison to the equation solver found in other Pioneer calculators such as the 27S/18Bii/17Bii (and that solver is now in Plus42 too).

[LinusSch]

(06-05-2022 02:33 PM)johanw Wrote:  I get that, but then what is the big advantage of a DM32 over a DM15(L)? More memory would be the only thing I can come up with.

Readable programming rather than keycodes.

Display size is a small advantage with the HP originals, but a giant leap with the DM32. Seeing all levels of the stack and more than one line at a time when programming is hugely important to me. (This may be due to learning on the 50g rather than on a single line RPN calculator.) To me this is the gamechanger, the feature that makes the DM32 a must-have.

For me, portrait orientation is also a plus, but that is clearly a matter of taste.

[jonmoore]

I suppose we're not just divided into those that don't mind well-designed menu diving vs those that want everything accessible on the faceplate. We're also divided into those that can't see the value in the DM32 vs DM41x and DM42. Unfortunately, all I see when I look at the DM32 is a limited feature set. The argument over 'saved keystrokes' being an advantage (saving limited memory) is negated on modern hardware. And it must be remembered that the alphanumeric entry methodology of the 41 and 42 doesn't factor in the key presses required to access a command/function when running a program, so it's not keystroke programming in the traditional sense.

I didn't purchase any of the SM Voyager clones as they didn't quite have the magic of the originals (the industrial design is far weaker), but I do consider the DM32 to be a success when it comes to the aesthetic aspects of its industrial design. However, considering the hardware is an updated version of the DM42/DM41x, I ask myself why I need to own a third iteration of the same hardware design with far fewer features. As mentioned before, if I'm not reaching for a classic HP pocket calculator, I tend to pick up the DM41x, as this can be used as a simple pocket calculator, but you always have access to your personal pick from the vast variety of 41 modules that you have loaded into flash memory.

The main thing that makes me reach for a classic Voyager over the 41x when leaving the house, is that much as the SM hardware has pocketable dimensions, it's a little on the heavy side for a pocket calculator.

If anything, I'd be more convinced about the DM32 for my personal needs if its weight were closer to that a Voyager. Still a portrait design (and with a large display), but made of lighter materials.

[LinusSch]

Saving keystrokes has never been about saving memory for me, I'm too young for that. It is about the speed of entering commands getting a little closer to the speed of thinking up the next step. It reduces my having to catch my train of thought, getting back to entering the commands from thinking ahead about what commands to enter. In this way a seemingly small difference sometimes (definitely not always) makes a big difference in not only the speed at which I can use the calculator or computer, but also the effort it takes mentally. YMMV.

I can see how this provides no value to those who already have and are happy with the DM42 and the DM41x. I don't have either, I didn't want to learn another calculator, and now I don't have to. Given this and my goto 50g, there is no value to me in the 42 and 41!

I don't envy the calculator makers. The market for each model quickly gets miniscule, as we're a pretty small bunch and we all want different things.

[jonmoore]

(06-05-2022 06:48 PM)LinusSch Wrote:  Saving keystrokes has never been about saving memory for me, I'm too young for that. It is about the speed of entering commands getting a little closer to the speed of thinking up the next step. It reduces my having to catch my train of thought, getting back to entering the commands from thinking ahead about what commands to enter.

I've never had that 'Rainman' ability to keystroke program at the speed of thought so typing commands out (or accessing them via menus) doesn't bother me!

Joking aside, I'm of that generation that tends to flowchart things before attempting to enter a program on a calculator (whatever the calculator, HP or other). I just find it useful to collect my thoughts in OmniGraffle (or similar) first before going near the calculator. And more often than that, I'm using a calculator in tandem with pencil and paper.

Funnily enough, I think SM have a great opportunity over the next few years. I suspect that the HP Prime will be the last ever high-end programmable scientific calculator with a HP badge. I'm not at all convinced that 3rd party licensees will be willing to invest the time and money to create and market a high-end scientific calculator that fits the needs of the education market. And sadly, the professional market that used to exist for previous high-end HP calculators no longer exists apart from in small pockets such as the MoHPC community.

I was speaking to one of the two main resellers of calculators to the UK education sector the other day and he's not even convinced that Casio and Ti will keep producing high-end programmable graphic calculators. The likes of Desmos is taking a significant chunk of their bottom line.

That's not to say that Casio and Ti won't continue to produce low-cost scientific calculators (or the HP licensees). The fx-991ex is the biggest seller Casio has ever produced. And it's not surprising, as it fits with the pre-college curriculum like a glove (with custom variations for regional curriculum differences). But for all its technical capabilities, its build quality is as cheap as you'd expect for a $30 calculator, and much to the majority of the education sector's delight, it isn't programmable.

Outside of SM, there's very little on offer for those looking for a programmable scientific calculator that goes beyond the capabilities of what's being produced for the education sector. But for SM to capitalise on this opportunity, they'll need to think beyond feeding the needs of the nostalgic. And in truth, only the DM42 achieves this in the current lineup. Much as the 41x is my favourite out of the pair, it's still at a fundamental level, a nostalgia-fest.

It seems that the long-promised WP43s is near to completion as Walter posted this on the SM forum over the weekend:

Quote:Looks like there are only 20 commands missing still - in total. Plus some fine tuning. The end is near!

Over the next 12 months, we could see the WP43s, DM32 and even a Plus42 firmware upgrade to the DM42 as part of the new SM lineup (wishful thinking on that last option!). And that's a decent segmented lineup of new calculator models that build on HP's legacy without being carbon-copy clones - as long as the SM team manage to extend the DM32 beyond the 32s/ii template in a manner that's fitting for the hardware platform.

[LinusSch]

Note "sometimes (definitely not always)". If labels + jumps > 3, it starts getting likely that I want a flowchart or a nicely readable structured language. But for very simple programs and for interactive use, often enough to me, it helps.