About DM32

[Vincent Weber]

(05-18-2023 09:49 AM)Paul Dale Wrote:  

(05-18-2023 06:52 AM)Vincent Weber Wrote:  Yes, but I think Valentin was more referring to NaNs and infinites...

They are there too. It's using Intel's decimal library underneath which is full IEEE 754. I don't know if or how well they are exposed.

Thanks! I amended my post accordingly.

[thenozone]

One thing to remember about the DM32 is that it allows you to save and share code, and store a lot of it, I personally don't like making code that is trapped in a machine or has to be reinterred if you explore other programs, and you can always load something else that some one has already done and save reinventing the wheel, or proudly share your developments.

[carey]

(05-18-2023 05:50 PM)thenozone Wrote:  One thing to remember about the DM32 is that it allows you to save and share code, and store a lot of it…

While the Swiss Micros DM32 product page lists a large flash memory size, I don't see user programming memory size mentioned anywhere. The HP32sii only had a small 390 byte programming space. Do you know if the DM32’s program memory exceeds 390 bytes? Otherwise, will be storing a lot of little programs, no?

[Rolief_Rechner]

Does anyone else have sticker shock? Considering the original machine was affordable entry level, €249 is just too much.

Regards - RR

[anetzer]

(05-19-2023 12:21 AM)Rolief_Rechner Wrote:  Does anyone else have sticker shock? Considering the original machine was affordable entry level, €249 is just too much.

Yes and no.

No because:

First it simply is a new platform and they need to milk buyers for its development (again).
Second the HP32 was a line of high repute and has a rank of its own for elegance and balance.
Third they re-developed the software. Whoever uses a DM41 knows about the tradeoff of an emulated machine…

That they deal to severe calcoholics and are therefore thoroughly absolved from any market rationality does not constitute a fourth argument but is a basic fact to acknowledge.

[EdS2]

There's nothing irrational about running a viable business.

[anetzer]

(05-19-2023 07:08 AM)EdS2 Wrote:  There's nothing irrational about running a viable business.

True.

I was referring to the customers however...

[EdS2]

Ah, right! On the same lines, I wouldn't say that recouping development costs can be called milking customers - if you spend some months or years developing something, you will have spent money doing that, and the pricing must reflect R&D.

I think the modern consumer is spoilt by the extreme low cost of mass-produced electronics. It shifts expectations, in a way which simply doesn't match what happens at quantities of 1000, 10,000 or even 100,000 units.

The way to think of these (Swiss!) calculators is like a decent mechanical watch or a musical instrument. ("A good beginner cello will cost anywhere between $1000 and $3000, whereas a great beginner violin can cost as little as $400")

[nickapos]

(05-19-2023 12:21 AM)Rolief_Rechner Wrote:  Does anyone else have sticker shock? Considering the original machine was affordable entry level, €249 is just too much.

Regards - RR

Unfortunately it’s too high for me, but I hope it is successful and SM produces many more models and achieve economy of scale so they can offer better prices without risking the viability of the company.

[jonmoore]

I'm staying out of price related conversations, but I'm pretty certain that a company doesn't need CHF: 24,999,000 in revenues ($27,749,214.99 at todays exchange rate) to make a reasonable return.

I've calculated based on 100k units as that was mentioned, but the same statement applies to 10k units too.

[EdS2]

Not sure if you can say anything about how reasonable their revenue is without knowing something about their cost breakdown.

It might be mildly interesting to figure out SM's production volumes, whether from filed accounts or from serial number analysis.

I very much recommend Bunnie Huang's blog for insight into manufacturing. Perhaps particularly the 4 part Factory Floor series of posts.
The Factory Floor, Part 1 of 4: The Quotation (or, How to Make a BOM)
The Factory Floor, Part 2 of 4: On Design for Manufacturing
The Factory Floor, Part 3 of 4: Industrial Design for Startups
The Factory Floor Part 4 of 4: Picking (and Maintaining) a Partner

I'm pretty sure he wrote somewhere that some quantity - might have been 1000 units - is the worst quantity from a manufacturing partner perspective. You're too big for prototypes but too small for mass production. You don't represent a healthy future revenue stream.

Quote:After all, “it’s people — supply chains are made out of people!”

[jonmoore]

(05-19-2023 02:01 PM)EdS2 Wrote:  Not sure if you can say anything about how reasonable their revenue is without knowing something about their cost breakdown.

It might be mildly interesting to figure out SM's production volumes, whether from filed accounts or from serial number analysis.

I very much recommend Bunnie Huang's blog for insight into manufacturing. Perhaps particularly the 4 part Factory Floor series of posts.
The Factory Floor, Part 1 of 4: The Quotation (or, How to Make a BOM)
The Factory Floor, Part 2 of 4: On Design for Manufacturing
The Factory Floor, Part 3 of 4: Industrial Design for Startups
The Factory Floor Part 4 of 4: Picking (and Maintaining) a Partner

I'm pretty sure he wrote somewhere that some quantity - might have been 1000 units - is the worst quantity from a manufacturing partner perspective. You're too big for prototypes but too small for mass production. You don't represent a healthy future revenue stream.

Quote:After all, “it’s people — supply chains are made out of people!”

I purposely left out any commentary regarding the cots of doing business as that's stretching conjecture to its limits. But the cost of doing business should be informed by the perceived value of the product you're marketing. It's all to easy to over or under estimate that perceived value.

HP in their prime, were masters of marketing hardware to specific niches. In most cases they ensured that the cost of doing business for each product was well matched to its perceived value. Although I suspect they had a few loss leaders in the mix too.

It really doesn't matter whether you're a mass market enterprise or a purveyor of boutique goods. You can't price your products simply on your cost of doing business. If there's a mismatch between that price and the price your customers are willing to pay, the situation won't be ideal.

[Thomas_Sch]

(05-18-2023 10:11 PM)carey Wrote:  

(05-18-2023 05:50 PM)thenozone Wrote:  One thing to remember about the DM32 is that it allows you to save and share code, and store a lot of it…

While the Swiss Micros DM32 product page lists a large flash memory size, I don't see user programming memory size mentioned anywhere. The HP32sii only had a small 390 byte programming space. Do you know if the DM32’s program memory exceeds 390 bytes? Otherwise, will be storing a lot of little programs, no?

Regarding RAM, from the video at HPCC2022, e.g. pos. 18:42;
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6EWNOE6BwQ)
"Far larger RAM (> 680x !) requires more Globals to be used effectively.."
and : "768 KB RAM" / " >> 256 KB RAM for appl."

[EdS2]

Indeed, a business which finds itself forced to charge more than the market supports will find itself heading to failure.

But there's a progressive response: as the price is higher, the fewer people will pay it. The best price for the health of the business will probably be higher than the one which everyone is happy to pay.

In this sense, we will always be doomed to see a few people complaining about things being overpriced - those people are the ones who are most price-sensitive.

I'm sure SM are quite clear that they sell something which is a niche product. They have no expectations of making a mass market student calculator, or even a calculator for the world's engineers. They sell to enthusiasts and collectors.

[DA74254]

(05-19-2023 04:33 PM)EdS2 Wrote:  Indeed, a business which finds itself forced to charge more than the market supports will find itself heading to failure.

But there's a progressive response: as the price is higher, the fewer people will pay it. The best price for the health of the business will probably be higher than the one which everyone is happy to pay.

In this sense, we will always be doomed to see a few people complaining about things being overpriced - those people are the ones who are most price-sensitive.

I'm sure SM are quite clear that they sell something which is a niche product. They have no expectations of making a mass market student calculator, or even a calculator for the world's engineers. They sell to enthusiasts and collectors.

Well. I, as an engineer, ordered one. I am convinced it is the perfect fit as a daily driver in my work onboard.
(OK, I'm a calcoholic too)

[EdS2]

Yes, that's why I wrote "the world's engineers" - that would represent a huge market. The few engineers who are enthusiasts fall helpfully in the category of enthusiasts.

[jonmoore]

(05-19-2023 04:33 PM)EdS2 Wrote:  But there's a progressive response: as the price is higher, the fewer people will pay it. The best price for the health of the business will probably be higher than the one which everyone is happy to pay.

In this sense, we will always be doomed to see a few people complaining about things being overpriced - those people are the ones who are most price-sensitive.

I'm sure SM are quite clear that they sell something which is a niche product. They have no expectations of making a mass market student calculator, or even a calculator for the world's engineers. They sell to enthusiasts and collectors.

And that's the beauty of perceived value. It's in the eye of the beholder (to butcher the much loved idiom). eBay would have gone out of business years ago, if it weren't for the fact that "one person's trash, is another person's treasure".

Not that I'm suggesting the DM32 is trash (before I get of torrent of irate PM's). SM haven't let us down in the past in terms of their calculators matching (and surpassing) expectations. The hardware has taken a few evolutionary iterations to truly shine, but the firmware has generally been well maintained.

For the record, I think all SM products to date have been priced appropriately for the quality of what's on offer, and the portfolio of calculators has lower-priced options for those with smaller budgets. But I do believe the DM32 to be out of step within the product portfolio regarding price.

Being price sensitive isn't a 'calcaholic sin', and I wouldn't classify any of those who've brought up price as whingers. The very fact they're posting on MoHPC in the first place suggests they're not only potential customers, I'd guess the majority have a purchased at least one SM calculator in the past. Their opinions should really matter to SM.

To be in the business of only selling to an ever shrinking audience of enthusiasts will end being a weaving self-written obituary. Surely, there's nothing wrong with creating and selling calculators that appeal beyond the already converted.

As long as there are students in the likes of engineering, finance and computer science, they'll be a market for well-designed specialist calculators. Sure, they'll be mass-produced tat available' marketed to these same students, but have faith that the young know a good thing when they see it. Especially if it's priced appropriately within the product portfolio. Any of the students I encounter take pride in their premium priced vinyl records, vintage Palm Pilots, Apple Newton's and HP calculators. And emulation platforms that're only capable of playing 20+ year old games are big business too.

[Valentin Albillo]

.
Hi,

(05-19-2023 04:26 PM)jonmoore Wrote:  HP in their prime, were masters of marketing hardware to specific niches. In most cases they ensured that the cost of doing business for each product was well matched to its perceived value.

Related to what you say, this is quoted from what Kahan said in his often-cited interview (my bolds):

On the HP-92 pricing:

"It was just marvelous, and it was going to be priced at $450. And the executives, especially those in marketing said, “Hey, there are people who would pay $750 for this. We should price it at $750.” “No, no!” came up a voice from below. “$450 is the right price.” “What the hell do you guys know?” said the more senior marketing people. “This is going to be value price. $750 is well worth it. We’ve shown it to various bigwigs, and they’ve said, ‘Oh yes, absolutely. I would be happy to pay $750 for this.’’’ And it came out with that price.
[...]
Well, needless to say, Hewlett-Packard finally did drop the price to, I think it was $495, or something. But it was too late. The bloom was off the rose.
[...]
We couldn’t get them out there because the price was too high, and lowering the price afterwards doesn’t really change people’s opinion. What they remember about things is first impressions, you see. You only get one chance to make a first impression."

On the HP-12C pricing:

"Okay, let’s look here. The HP-12C financial calculator, you see the list price, initially $120? And these guys were going to sell it to you for $90. But it only cost HP something less than $15 to make."

V.

[Steve Simpkin]

(05-20-2023 12:33 AM)Valentin Albillo Wrote:  .
Hi,

(05-19-2023 04:26 PM)jonmoore Wrote:  HP in their prime, were masters of marketing hardware to specific niches. In most cases they ensured that the cost of doing business for each product was well matched to its perceived value.

Related to what you say, this is quoted from what Kahan said in his often-cited interview (my bolds):

On the HP-92 pricing:

"It was just marvelous, and it was going to be priced at $450. And the executives, especially those in marketing said, “Hey, there are people who would pay $750 for this. We should price it at $750.” “No, no!” came up a voice from below. “$450 is the right price.” “What the hell do you guys know?” said the more senior marketing people. “This is going to be value price. $750 is well worth it. We’ve shown it to various bigwigs, and they’ve said, ‘Oh yes, absolutely. I would be happy to pay $750 for this.’’’ And it came out with that price.
[...]
Well, needless to say, Hewlett-Packard finally did drop the price to, I think it was $495, or something. But it was too late. The bloom was off the rose.
[...]
We couldn’t get them out there because the price was too high, and lowering the price afterwards doesn’t really change people’s opinion. What they remember about things is first impressions, you see. You only get one chance to make a first impression."

On the HP-12C pricing:

"Okay, let’s look here. The HP-12C financial calculator, you see the list price, initially $120? And these guys were going to sell it to you for $90. But it only cost HP something less than $15 to make."

V.

Or regarding quantity...

KAHAN: "The HP 12C was successful enough that they were willing to take my advice about building the 15C, but not take my advice about how many to build. They wanted a third of my figure, and Harms did half again what they wanted, and that’s what they were doing. They were producing half of my number. The marketing people had a third of my number. I shouldn’t have said a half. The marketing people had a third of my number, and Harms ended up with the production line producing half of my target number, and then these calculators were disappearing off the shelves as fast as they could be supplied. MIT, for example, for a couple of years was telling its freshmen that they should buy the calculator, and it had a special deal with HP that would get them involved in a somewhat lower price.
HAIGH: What year did the calculator appear?
KAHAN: I think it was 1982, give or take. We could probably look at the manuals and find out exactly when it appeared. Well, HP never produced an advertisement for the 15C in its own right in any Western language. It might have had advertisements that listed the 15C and the 16C and the 11C and so on, but never for the 15C in its own right except for one in Japanese. I saw an advertisement in Japanese. They were selling them by word of mouth as fast as they could produce them, and when my friends and I who had worked on this went to the marketing people and tried to persuade them, “Look, set up another production line, because you want to gather your flowers while you may,” they said, “No, if we set up another production line, we may end up with inventory after all. You know how sales go. The sales rise to a peak and then they go down,” and these guys thought that they must be hitting the peak. They weren’t hitting a peak. They were hitting a ceiling. It’s a different thing. So they never did set up another production line. In consequence, the market was starved. There were waiting lists, and that window closed, and so I never did get the calculators into the hands of sufficiently many students to change the ways in which professors would issue assignments, and that was a bitter disappointment. It colored my relations with this particular group at HP. I continued to work with them for a couple of years, but my heart just wasn’t in it anymore."

[Valentin Albillo]

(05-20-2023 02:29 AM)Steve Simpkin Wrote:  Or regarding quantity...

KAHAN: "The HP 12C was successful enough that [...] I continued to work with them for a couple of years, but my heart just wasn’t in it anymore."

You already posted the same quote in full a few days ago, Steve.

V.