43s status

[brouhaha]

(01-26-2015 09:48 PM)rprosperi Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 09:25 PM)John Galt Wrote:  May I suggest one more?
• Approximately months of average daily use from only one pair of commonly available CR2032 cells.

Actually it's likely to be 2 x AA batteries. Lots of history on this (most is in these forum pages, some from the last 2 HHC meetings.) But I do think that with that power one may expect weeks to months - Eric, help me out on this if I'm messing this up.

Estimating battery life is quite difficult due in large part to everyone using their calculator differently. Most calculators with monochrome LCD displays have three power modes, which are sometimes known as

• run - calculator is actually "thinking" or running a user program
• light sleep - display is on and keyboard is live, but calculator is mostly idle
• deep sleep - "off", but memory preserved and real-time-clock is running
  

The battery life depends on the capacity of the battery, the current or power drawn in each of those three states, and how much time the calculator spends in each state. Another tricky aspect is how much usable capacity the disposable cells have, because that isn't a constant, but varies depending on the load.

The WP-43S firmware doesn't exist yet, so I can't measure its perfomance and power consumption. However, on the N-Queens benchmark, the WP-34s has about 467 times the performance of the HP-41CX, at about 1/319 of the power consumption. The XC42 hardware running Free42 firmware and the same benchmark has about 26 times the performance of the HP-41CX at about 1/54 the power consumption.

The battery life of the XC42 running Free42 firmware on two AA alkaline cells, assuming that the cells provide 2000 mAh of usable capacity, is about 12 days in continuous run mode, or 2 years in light sleep, or 5 years in deep sleep. (The computed figures for light sleep and deep sleep are even longer than that, but I've somewhat arbitrarily reduced them to take into account battery self-discharge). Real calculator usage will consist of some mix of the three modes, and actual battery life will depend on the mix. WP-43S firmware will probably provide similar battery life, though it will be able to do significantly more work per second of run mode.

I've attached a spreadsheet with power measurements and estimates, and benchmark results. The data comes from a variety of sources, noted at the bottom of the spreadsheet. While the information is generally believed to by accurate, it is provided on an AS-IS basis with no warranty, and I accept no liability for errors or omissions. I do NOT recommend that this data be put into any WP-43S marketing information at this time, as it is far too preliminary.

John Galt Wrote:The display seemed as though it will be prohibitively power-hungry, and I would gladly be proven wrong about that.

The display was specifically chosen because it is very much NOT power-hungry. There are very few off-the-shelf LCD displays that have suitable characteristics for a calculator, and Richard Ottosen and I were astounded to discover the quality and low power of the display we've chosen. It's an expensive display, but we think it's worth the money.

[walter b]

(01-27-2015 03:30 AM)brouhaha Wrote:  I do NOT recommend that this data be put into any WP-43S marketing information at this time, as it is far too preliminary.

I won't do that, promised. And I won't do any marketing at all, just try keeping people interested over months and years - and answering some requests.

Quote:The display was specifically chosen because it is very much NOT power-hungry. There are very few off-the-shelf LCD displays that have suitable characteristics for a calculator, and Richard Ottosen and I were astounded to discover the quality and low power of the display we've chosen. It's an expensive display, but we think it's worth the money.

For sure! That display's the biggest asset of the 43S (no pun intended).

d:-)

[John Galt]

(01-27-2015 03:30 AM)brouhaha Wrote:  , the WP-34s has about 467 times the performance of the HP-41CX, at about 1/319 of the power consumption.

I have been frankly astounded at the performance of the WP-34s. It's freaking fast.

(01-27-2015 03:30 AM)brouhaha Wrote:  The battery life of the XC42 running Free42 firmware on two AA alkaline cells, assuming that the cells provide 2000 mAh of usable capacity, is about 12 days in continuous run mode, or 2 years in light sleep, or 5 years in deep sleep.

That is very welcome news, since I had serious doubts about being able to achieve power efficiency anywhere near what you describe with any display I'm familiar with. The spreadsheet data seems almost too good to be true - a fraction of the 34S power? I realize it's preliminary but those are astonishing numbers.

A major reason for me not considering the HP Prime was its battery life. I need a calculator to sit in a drawer, possibly for weeks on end, and be ready when I need it. If I want to charge something every day, I've got an iPhone for that.

Now I'm really looking forward to the 43S.

[Dave Frederickson]

(01-27-2015 04:11 AM)John Galt Wrote:  Now I'm really looking forward to the 43S.

They might be a little pricey.

(01-04-2015 10:01 PM)Paul Dale Wrote:  It would make things a lot quieter if we limited the polls to those willing to spend $500 on the device -- I don't know what the exact price will be, but cheap it will not be.

[brouhaha]

(01-27-2015 04:50 AM)Dave Frederickson Wrote:  

(01-27-2015 04:11 AM)John Galt Wrote:  Now I'm really looking forward to the 43S.

They might be a little pricey.

True, if you substitute "will" for "might", and "lot" for "little". Not entirely unlike the dialog in Batman Returns:

Quote:henchman: I mean, killing sleeping children... isn't that a little...?
Penguin: [shoots henchman] No! It's a *LOT*!

[brouhaha]

(01-27-2015 04:11 AM)John Galt Wrote:  The spreadsheet data seems almost too good to be true - a fraction of the 34S power? I realize it's preliminary but those are astonishing numbers.

The XC-42 numbers in the spreadsheet are actual measurements of the current drain, using an Agilent 34410A multimeter. Due to firmware differences, the current drain for units that are eventually shipped may be different than what's in the spreadsheet, but probably not by a huge amount.

The XC-42 hardware nominally runs on a 14 MHz RC oscillator, though there are other choices including approximately 1, 7, 11, 14, 21, and 28 MHz RC and (possibly) 48 MHz crystal. However, there is one wait state on the flash memory at 16 MHz or above, and two wait states at 32 MHz or above, so the higher frequencies show diminishing returns. The WP-43S firmware could potentially allow some user control over this.

[PANAMATIK]

(01-27-2015 04:50 AM)Dave Frederickson Wrote:  They might be a little pricey.

To manufacture such a device cheaper needs the purchase infrastructure of a big global player company.

Is there already a list? Please put me on for one, even for 500$ - I hope you will not really go up to this limit

Bernhard

[walter b]

(01-27-2015 04:50 AM)Dave Frederickson Wrote:  They might be a little pricey.

Not at all, they will be a little costly instead.

d:-/

[walter b]

(01-27-2015 05:30 AM)brouhaha Wrote:  The XC-42 hardware ... runs on ... approximately 1, 7, 11, 14, 21, and 28 MHz RC and (possibly) 48 MHz crystal. ... The WP-34S firmware could potentially allow some user control over this.

Assume WP 43S, don't I?

d:-?

[walter b]

(01-27-2015 03:19 PM)Dave Frederickson Wrote:  

(01-27-2015 09:25 AM)walter b Wrote:  Not at all, they will be a little costly instead.

Thank you for the grammar check, but I was using American slang.

That's nothing concerning grammar, that's just a different meaning.

d:-)

[John Galt]

(01-27-2015 09:25 AM)walter b Wrote:  ... they will be a little costly instead.

I know I spent over $200 for my 41CX. Adding two X memory modules brought it to nearly $300. Whatever that price was though, I am quite certain it would approach twice that much in today's USD... all for 1/467th the performance and 319 * the power consumption.

[walter b]

Look, Sir:

• when you talk about something being pricey it means its price is high;
• when you talk about something being costly it means its costs are high.
  

Notice the difference? The price it what the vendor demands - the costs are what the manufacturer has to pay.

d;-)

[brouhaha]

(01-27-2015 09:06 AM)PANAMATIK Wrote:  Is there already a list? Please put me on for one, even for 500$ - I hope you will not really go up to this limit

There isn't any list. We're hoping to sell the hardware for approximately $300, but obviously we aren't actually making any commitment to that yet.

[brouhaha]

(01-27-2015 09:29 AM)walter b Wrote:  

(01-27-2015 05:30 AM)brouhaha Wrote:  The XC-42 hardware ... runs on ... approximately 1, 7, 11, 14, 21, and 28 MHz RC and (possibly) 48 MHz crystal. ... The WP-34S firmware could potentially allow some user control over this.

Assume WP 43S, don't I?

Yes, I did mean WP 43S. Thanks for pointing that out. I've edited my original post to correct that.

So the correct designation for it is "WP 43S"? Space rather than hyphen, and all letters upper case? Is the same true for 34, i.e., "WP 34S"? I've probably been getting this wrong all along.

FWIW, my personal preference would be with a hyphen, and upper case S. However, as previously stated, the person who does the work gets to make the decisions, and for the naming that's not me.

[walter b]

Quote:So the correct designation for it is "WP 43S"? Space rather than hyphen, and all letters upper case? Is the same true for 34, i.e., "WP 34S"?

Yes, it is. Though I understand other spellings, too. But it's as in math: you're free in defining - but thereafter you must stick to your definition.

d:-)

(BTW, you find it in TFM. Surprise! )

[d b]

(01-27-2015 09:25 AM)walter b Wrote:  

(01-27-2015 04:50 AM)Dave Frederickson Wrote:  They might be a little pricey.

Not at all, they will be a little costly instead.

d

(01-27-2015 03:29 PM)walter b Wrote:  

(01-27-2015 03:19 PM)Dave Wrote:  Thank you for the grammar check, but I was using American slang.

That's nothing concerning grammar, that's just a different meaning.

d:-)

Mr. Frederickson; Like everyone; I understood what you were saying just fine. Your west coast American has become one of the two de-facto English dialects, the other one being BBC English, of course. A former sweetie from Idaho would have said "spendy".

[Ángel Martin]

(01-27-2015 04:41 PM)walter b Wrote:  Look, Sir:

• when you talk about something being pricey it means its price is high;
• when you talk about something being costly it means its costs are high.
  

Notice the difference? The price it what the vendor demands - the costs are what the manufacturer has to pay.

d;-)

So now we're getting educated on value theory? Fascinating but that's not really why I read this forum. BTW congratulations if you can draw a line between price and cost, many hundreds of marketing wizards make a living on the gray areas and subjective zones between those concepts - and millions of potential/prospects keep buying all their charade.

[walter b]

(01-28-2015 06:38 AM)Den Belillo (Martinez Ca.) Wrote:  

(01-27-2015 09:25 AM)walter b Wrote:  Not at all, they will be a little costly instead.

d

(01-27-2015 03:29 PM)walter b Wrote:  That's nothing concerning grammar, that's just a different meaning.

d:-)

Mr. Frederickson; Like everyone; I understood what you were saying just fine. Your west coast American has become one of the two de-facto English dialects, the other one being BBC English, of course. A former sweetie from Idaho would have said "spendy".

That's strange, Den: your post is displayed but not found in the thread.

d:-?

[Massimo Gnerucci]

(01-28-2015 07:21 AM)walter b Wrote:  That's strange, Den: your post is displayed but not found in the thread.

d:-?

It's a new feature: now you have Quote, New Reply and Phantom Reply.

:p

[walter b]

(01-28-2015 06:52 AM)Ángel Martin Wrote:  So now we're getting educated on value theory? Fascinating but that's not really why I read this forum. BTW congratulations if you can draw a line between price and cost, many hundreds of marketing wizards make a living on the gray areas and subjective zones between those concepts - and millions of potential/prospects keep buying all their charade.

Sorry, I don't want to educate you (nor can I). Just wanted to point out there may be some higher order vibrations in some text written here.

BTW, also your post isn't indicated in this thread. Fascinating.

d:-)