differences in casio 991ES and 991CW calculators

[Liamtoh Resu]

I just purchasd the 991CW.

The 991CW has switched functions from the keyboard to menus.
IMHO casio maybe targeting cell phone calculator users.

You can see the differences in the keyboard layout on Amazon.

[Dands]

You're pretty late for this party bud.

[Steve Simpkin]

Here is a thread that discusses some of the differences with the new fx-991CW model.
https://www.hpmuseum.org/forum/thread-19...68274.html

[Liamtoh Resu]

There was a gap in my reading of this thread. Thanks for the link to the previous threads.
Taking the high road.

[Steve Simpkin]

Here is an 8 minute video that compares the new FX-991CW (introduced late 2022) to the fx-991EX (introduced 2015). Personally I prefer the fx-991EX.

Casio FX-991EX vs FX-991CW | Calculator Comparison
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkyWpMC3xB4

Edit: Be sure to look at the comments after the video as they have additional differences and correct a few mistakes in the video.

[Steve Simpkin]

One pet peeve I have with the CW models is that the x10ˣ key works differently in the CW models then on *most* scientific calculators made in the past 50 years.

Try 1 ÷ 2x10³ on almost any scientific calculator (including the fx-991EX) and you will get 0.0005 (5x10⁻⁴).

On the CW models you will get an answer of 500. For the CW models you have to enter 1 ÷ (2x10³) to get 0.0005.

[toml_12953]

(09-26-2024 02:12 PM)Liamtoh Resu Wrote:  I just purchasd the 991CW.

The 991CW has switched functions from the keyboard to menus.
IMHO casio maybe targeting cell phone calculator users.

You can see the differences in the keyboard layout on Amazon.

Here's a detailed look at the differences

https://tiplanet.org/compare/?fx991cw,fx991es

[Albert Chan]

(09-26-2024 07:57 PM)Steve Simpkin Wrote:  Try 1 ÷ 2x10³ on almost any scientific calculator (including the fx-991EX) and you will get 0.0005 (5x10⁻⁴).

On the CW models you will get an answer of 500.

Technically, CW model is correct, if we assume "x" is multiply. (*)
This suggested old models were wrong, unless they use E notation.

(*) Not a bad assumption, because multiply also use "x" symbol, only slightly raised.
On my Casio fx-115ES Plus, difference is only 1 pixel length higher ... who can tell?

[lrdheat]

Sounds like the CW is assuming chain operating mode. A division example could use the xxx/yyy button option to avoid this sort of circumstance.

[dm319]

(09-26-2024 07:57 PM)Steve Simpkin Wrote:  On the CW models you will get an answer of 500. For the CW models you have to enter 1 ÷ (2x10³) to get 0.0005.

That is ridiculous! But I suppose Albert is right, that it is technically correct. But it is still ridiculous.

This was an unintended loss of going from 'E' notation to 'x10^x'.

In my mind scientific notation is a 'number', rather than expression. Like -2 is a number. Or 2+3i.

Maybe they should have written it as 2(10)³.

But then we'll be back to all the arguing about factors/products/BODMAS.

Or just go back to E.

[Dave Britten]

(09-26-2024 07:57 PM)Steve Simpkin Wrote:  One pet peeve I have with the CW models is that the x10ˣ key works differently in the CW models then on *most* scientific calculators made in the past 50 years.

Try 1 ÷ 2x10³ on almost any scientific calculator (including the fx-991EX) and you will get 0.0005 (5x10⁻⁴).

On the CW models you will get an answer of 500. For the CW models you have to enter 1 ÷ (2x10³) to get 0.0005.

Frankly I think the "Math" input mode should just remove the division symbol altogether, and have the divide key enter the fraction bar instead. It would eliminate a LOT of potential careless mistakes and pitfalls like this.

[Albert Chan]

(09-28-2024 12:07 PM)dm319 Wrote:  ... Or just go back to E.

I agree! Why mess with a good thing!

[Steve Simpkin]

Yes for many years Casio used the key labeled "EXP" to enter the exponent of a number. This was equivalent to the EEX key on HP calculators and the EE key on TI models. Then at some point Casio relabeled the EXP key to "x10ˣ" but kept the same enter exponent function. Now with the CW series, they kept the label the same but have changed what the key does. That is my complaint. Don't just change how the key works on previous models without changing its label. That is confusing.

TI did did a similar key function change with *some* of their MultiView models. They deleted the "EE" key and replaced it with a "x10ˣ" on models such as the TI-30XS and TI-34 MultiView. This new key works like the "x10ˣ key on the Casio CW models. However in the case of TI, they did not change the function of the key without changing its label. The TI-30X Pro MultiView (identical to the TI-36 Pro) continues to use the EE key.
You can see the two different TI keys on this MultiView emulator page.
https://web.archive.org/web/201612141950...github.io/

[cjsuk]

Just fell over this on my quarterly forum check.

The new CW ones are the devil's butthole when it comes to calculators. Absolutely despise them. The worst one is the black one with blue legend which is entirely invisible. The menus are horrible, the functions are horrible and there are a number of weird bugs when manipulating the previous answer. And they slide around all over the place and the display contrast is terrible in anything other than perfect light. Not impressed.

Someone gave them a design award for the steamer.

Alas I have just been forced to use one, an 85CW for academic reasons and buy one for my daughter for the same reason.

Urgh.

I think the redesign was really prompted by the large market of cloned 991EX and similar on the Chinese market which are chock full of nasty bugs. That is rather than a redesign to make things better for the end user...