DM42

[Vtile]

(08-09-2016 04:19 AM)MDBarrett88 Wrote:  -cut-
TL;DR: I think the DM42 could include functions not only from the 42S, but also the 17BII.
If you have been keeping track, I have only utilized 5 of the 6 top buttons. What would be a good thing to include on the last one? What do you all think of giving a scientific calculator financial functions? Would you do anything different? What? Any other thoughts?

Well they say that amateurs think strategy and professionals think logistics. I wouldn't mind at all that there would be a financial calculator features on hand. Last key would be be USER shift key (from 41,48,50 etc.).

[Jeff O.]

(08-09-2016 04:19 AM)MDBarrett88 Wrote:  Hope it's not too late to jump in, but I had a thought about the DM42 that I'd like to share...
I do realize that the people at SwissMicros are already hard at work on finishing the hardware, and that the free42 project already has a list of priorities. I am not making demands, rather some suggestions and humble requests...

I like your suggestion to include functionality from the 17BII. I have one and use it frequently, so it would be nice to combine the functions of two great calculators into one device.

I also had some thoughts for enhancements that might be possible with the DM42, but hesitated to suggest because (as you acknowledge above) it is easy to ask for things that others will have to implement. Now that the ice is broken, I'll go ahead. I don't think I am asking for a lot, but I'll leave that to others to judge.

My suggested enhancements return to my well-worn, dead-horse-beaten wishes for improved complex number support. I won't ask for a complete redesign of the entry and display paradigm, just one (hopefully) simple change. On the 42S, the shifted COMPLEX function above the STO key has two functions, depending on the contents of the X and Y registers. If the X and Y registers both contain real values, executing COMPLEX will assemble a complex number from the values in the X and Y registers, placing said number in the X register. If a complex value resides in the X register prior to executing COMPLEX, the function will decompose the complex number into its two components, placing them in the X and Y registers. (If there is a real value in X and a complex value in Y, executing COMPLEX will result in an “Invalid Type” error.) My wish for the DM42 would be to augment (not replace) this method of entering complex values. Instead of being an actual function, COMPLEX would open a soft menu above the soft keys. The functions in this menu would be as follows:

i_____/_____R<>C_____ABS_____ARG_____CONJ

CONJ, ABS and ARG would have the obvious functions. R<>C would function exactly as COMPLEX does in the 42S. If two reals are in X and Y, assemble into a complex value placed in X. If a complex value is in X, disassemble into two reals in X and Y. This would insure compatibility with any existing programs a user might care to use that included the COMPLEX function. It would also allow users who prefer the existing method of complex number assembly and disassembly to continue to use it while eliminating the need to press the shift key constantly - just put up the COMPLEX menu and use the R<>C function. The i and / functions would allow direct entry of complex values: for a rectangular form number, key in the real part, press i, then key in the imaginary component. For a polar form number, key in the magnitude, press /, then key in the angle. Upon pressing ENTER, the complex value would be automatically converted to the current display format if it was entered in the other format. This would eliminate the need to perform the ->REC and ->POL functions to set things right if you were working in rectangular mode but had to enter a number in polar form or vice versa. (While not necessary, I might ask that a second pressing of the i or / key would terminate entry of the value, convert to the proper display format if necessary, and enable stack lift. I.e., it would behave exactly like pressing EXIT, or x<>y twice, or any other pair of inverse functions.)

As an alternative to changing the COMPLEX function on the keyboard into a menu call, the sixth shifted soft-key position left over from your 17BII suggestion could be used, labelled CPX or CPLX or similar to differentiate from the standard COMPLEX function. I'd still leave the R<>C function in my menu to enable repeated unshifted execution of that function.

Questions? Comments? Jeers? Cheers?

[Logan]

That's a neat idea. I liked (somewhat) how complex numbers were implemented on the HP 35s with the i and theta symbols, and this gives that option. An extra keystroke I guess.

But yeah, I don't know how many "extra" features would be going in at this point. I'd love to see some modifications down the road though.

[Vtile]

Nice proposal. The content of the meny should have duplicate for Polar / Rectangular coordinate system switch. That way you don't need to take ABS and ARG for complex number in rectangular form to get amplitude or phase shift. If you are only making sanity checks and other simple calculus.

[Jeff O.]

(08-12-2016 06:46 PM)Vtile Wrote:  Nice proposal. The content of the meny should have duplicate for Polar / Rectangular coordinate system switch. That way you don't need to take ABS and ARG for complex number in rectangular form to get amplitude or phase shift. If you are only making sanity checks and other simple calculus.

Good idea, but how about instead of repeating the display mode choice functions (RECT and POLAR in the MODE menu), implement a SHOW-type command that would temporarily present the X-value in the currently non-active display mode. Maybe label it C-SHOW. That way you would not have to use two soft key positions, and it would only take one key press to see the value in the other format while remaining in the current display mode. I could live without the CONJ command, I mostly just put that there to fill out the six soft keys. I hardly ever need to take the complex conjugate. So now my COMPLEX (or CPX or CPLX) menu would be:

i_____/_____R<>C_____ABS_____ARG_____C-SHOW

[Logan]

I haven't thought this completely through yet, but one of the things I like (and dislike) about the HP 35s is that it has single-letter variables. It is handy for a quick calculation to not have to go to an alpha menu to store a variable, on the other hand it is useful to have more than one letter for variables in programs.

So if there is a full alphabet on the keyboard, perhaps pressing one of those keys just enters the letter and moves on (e.g., STO, A) and entering a multi-letter variable uses the alpha lock (e.g., STO, ENTER, A,B,C, ENTER or STO, shift, ALPHA, A,B,C, ENTER).

I don't know if Swiss Micro usually posts their code but maybe it is something I could work on myself.

[Ron Ross]

I actually suggest that Alpha keys are NOT on the keys and in menus just like the current Hp 42s. Why? because that is what got the Hp 32sii (and even current Hp 35s) banned from many exams, when many exams simply want to ban graphing calculators (such as ASQ - American Society of Quality exams). However, these exams often state any alpha characters on the keyboard are not allowed for the exam.
.
I would appreciate the ability to upload and download programs onto the calculator vs the Hp 42s's limited I/O.
.

Just my 2 cents.

[Logan]

Three thoughts on that:
1. The HP 35s has alpha keys and is not a banned calculator for at least the FE/PE, not sure what other exams it would be banned from.
2. The DM 42 would likely not be a recognized calculator by any testing body anyway, and I'd rather not have it dumbed down to try to be.
3. Having I/O capability is more likely to get a calculator banned than alpha keys.

Plus, I only mentioned it because the prototype showed a full alpha key set.

[Helix]

Since nobody reported this, here are the latest news of the DM42P:

Michael Steinmann :
"the software still needs a lot of work.
I'll make a video demonstration this weekend."

(Found on the "HP calculator fan club" Facebook page.)

[Luigi Vampa]

Merci beaucoup pour l'image Jean-Charles.
Nevertheless, I couldn't find it in that public Facebook group.
BTW, I have dared to tilt&crop it.
It looks really nice :O)

[EDIT: I just miss the traditional 'Scientific Calculator' label. Now that we live in the 21st. century, maybe it could be an updated 'STEM Calculator' label ;O) ]

[Helix]

(08-27-2016 04:24 PM)Luigi Vampa Wrote:  Merci beaucoup pour l'image Jean-Charles.
Nevertheless, I couldn't find it in that public Facebook group.

De rien, don Luigi
This image, and too additional images, are deeply buried into the comments of the first "post". (I'm not very familiar with Facebook). You must expand all the comments, at too levels, to find them.

[RMollov]

I hope the key finish of the real product doesn't look like the prototype's

[Ángel Martin]

and I'm hoping that the SHIFT key is GOLD/YELLOW in the released model (!)

[rflesch]

Regarding the picture shown in Helix'es post:
Anything known about the exact size?
Roman

[Massimo Gnerucci]

(09-03-2016 04:22 PM)rflesch Wrote:  Regarding the picture shown in Helix'es post:
Anything known about the exact size?
Roman

See above.

[rflesch]

Massimo,
sorry, thank you. I should read rather than post.
R.

[Massimo Gnerucci]

(09-03-2016 06:50 PM)rflesch Wrote:  Massimo,
sorry, thank you. I should read rather than post.
R.

Why sorry?
I think that reading the whole thread is worthwhile though.

[Michael de Estrada]

Does anyone know the current status of this project ? Will it ever see the light of day ?

[Sylvain Cote]

(10-02-2016 02:20 PM)Michael de Estrada Wrote:  Does anyone know the current status of this project ? Will it ever see the light of day ?

At the HHC2016, it was clear that the software was not complete.
From the room discussions, I got the impression that the release target was either the end of this year or the beginning of the next.
BTW, I am in line to get at least one ... 8-)
Sylvain

[Thomas Okken]

(08-24-2016 10:54 AM)Logan Wrote:  I don't know if Swiss Micro usually posts their code but maybe it is something I could work on myself.

The Free42 source code is GPL-licensed, so they will have to make the DM42 source code available, at least to people who actually buy one.

Whether or not they'll support people flashing their own firmware builds is a separate question (which is addressed by GPLv3, but Free42 is licensed under GPLv2), but I would be surprised if they didn't support that as well.