Worth updating?

[lrdheat]

I have WP 34S version 3.2 3467 on what had been an HP 30B. This version had the 2 line display for imaginary numbers which I like.

I'm wondering if folks that have upgraded to newer versions have found it worth the effort (in my case, sending it to folks that have been kind enough to flash my unit before). That would also entail be WP 34S'less for a couple of weeks!

What have been your experiences? I really like what I've got in my current edition!

[BarryMead]

There are a few other options besides waiting for shipping. You could add a flashing port (Harald Pott's USB jack or Marcus von Cube's 2.5mm headphone jack) or your could build a "pogo pin" flashing cable of your own (to flash through the existing port under the back cover). With any of these options you would be able to update the firmware whenever it suits you, and you also gain the ability to upload/download programs and data between your calculator and the computer based emulator. Many members of the forum enjoy being able to try out alternate firmware variations, once they have created this local flashing capability.

[John Galt]

Personally I am really enjoying Bit's custom builds. Read about it here: http://www.hpmuseum.org/forum/thread-2433.html

If you send yours out to be flashed, consider requesting that one. There really are no disadvantages to it vs. the mainline builds, just certain augmentations some people may consider valuable. I do.

[lrdheat]

Thanks, John.

As Barry has seen, I am just an amateur at programming...I do think I will seek a new flash...not too interested in the enhanced HP 16 tools that have been made available, I'm looking for the scientific utility. I am a meteorologist, old school, went through my coursework in the early 1970's using slide rules. The HP 35 was just coming out...it was so amazing that the meteorology department (all the professors quickly purchased them) made a number of them available to students that could sit at a desk with the calculator secured in a locked cradle so that they (the calculators) wouldn't walk away. I remember wondering at the time if symbolic math would ever be possible on a hand held device (didn't imagine that it would be accomplished in my lifetime)!

The WP 34S is outstanding. Privileged to have it in my shirt pocket!

[BarryMead]

(03-14-2015 03:28 AM)lrdheat Wrote:  in the early 1970's using slide rules. The HP 35 was just coming out

I still have my original HP-35 that I bought back in 1972. I waited for months for my pre-ordered unit to arrive, and I was the first kid in my whole Junior College to have one. It was a very liberating experience to be able to "CALCULATE" any math problem to a whopping 10 digits of accuracy with a dynamic range or 9.99999999 E 99 to 1.0 E -99!!! Until the advent of the HP-35 this kind of computing power was only possible on large desktop units, or mainframe computers. Slide Rules couldn't come close with their 2-1/2 to 3 digit accuracy, and you still had to keep track of the decimal point and powers of 10 manually. It was truly REVOLUTIONARY to carry this kind of power in your pocket.

[lrdheat]

My dad got one in 1973. He came home with the plastic carrying case, opened it up, and, here was mathematical joy! He kept it in perfect, as it turned out, mainly unused condition. I have it on my desk at work, working beautifully, still have it's plastic travel case which houses batteries, cords, leather case, it's shipping box, and it's wonderful user guide!

[lrdheat]

As an addendum, I have my best slide rule, a Faber Castell Mathema N84 and my dad's best K&E duplex rule next to the HP 35 on my desk at work! Most of the folks don't know what the slide rules are (even younger math teachers!)

[Jlouis]

(03-14-2015 12:16 PM)lrdheat Wrote:  My dad got one in 1973. He came home with the plastic carrying case, opened it up, and, here was mathematical joy! He kept it in perfect, as it turned out, mainly unused condition. I have it on my desk at work, working beautifully, still have it's plastic travel case which houses batteries, cords, leather case, it's shipping box, and it's wonderful user guide!

Congratulations Irdheat. I love to hear calculators stories.

If it's possible, put some photos of your 35 and acessories here.

I will be delighted.

Cheers

[lrdheat]

Hi Jlouis,

How do I move a photo from my i-pad to here?[/php][/code][/quote]

[lrdheat]

When I select an image from my photo library, I get a message saying that type of file must be under 200kb. This was a surprise as I thought an attachment could be 3 megabytes.

[MarkHaysHarris777]

(03-17-2015 04:03 AM)lrdheat Wrote:  When I select an image from my photo library, I get a message saying that type of file must be under 200kb. This was a surprise as I thought an attachment could be 3 megabytes.

howdy... nice to meet you... what I do with my images is 'process' them with GIMP (gnu/linux photo processing program). Try a couple of things:

1) scale the image... pic a value like cm or inches (whatever you understand best) and make the image a reasonable size for the screen.

2) export the image as reduced jpg. Set the reduction to something between 60 and 70. The image will lose quality (but nobody will notice).

The result is that that 1.47 meg photo from your camera will turn into a 35k (or smaller) file photo that will look great on screen.

Also, you can leave the photo in the cloud and just point the link here to your cloud services file. And as Dave F taught me, you can put up a thumb (reducing size further here) as a link to the larger photo on your cloud.

Cheers,
marcus

[Dieter]

(03-17-2015 04:37 AM)MarkHaysHarris777 Wrote:  howdy... nice to meet you... what I do with my images is 'process' them with GIMP (gnu/linux photo processing program).

GIMP is also available for other platforms, including Windows. But I think it's a bit too much for such a simple task. I'd recommend programs like XnView or the Faststone Image Viewer. These are very versatile and useful tools not only for digital photography.

(03-17-2015 04:37 AM)MarkHaysHarris777 Wrote:  1) scale the image... pic a value like cm or inches (whatever you understand best) and make the image a reasonable size for the screen.

Centimeters or inches only make sense together with an adjusted dpi setting (pixel size = size in inches times relative resolution in dpi). Which may be a bit too much for a beginner trying to scale a picture. I'd strongly recommend using absolute dimensions in pixels. For instance 1000 pixels width or height, whichever is greater. The other dimension usually is set automatically according to the aspect ratio of the image.

(03-17-2015 04:37 AM)MarkHaysHarris777 Wrote:  2) export the image as reduced jpg. Set the reduction to something between 60 and 70. The image will lose quality (but nobody will notice).

Dito. However, what one software calls "60%" may be "8 out of 12" or "7 out of 10" in another program. ;-) BTW XnView and the Faststone Image Viewer have very effective JPEG algorithms, so the size/quality ratio is quite good there.

I'd finally recommend removing all metadata and have the file optimized. This can be done with various programs, including the two mentioned above. Real cowboys may do this with a command line utility and lots of cryptic options. ;-)

Dieter