43S News

General discussion about calculators, Swiss Micros or otherwise
dlachieze
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 10:20 am
Location: France

Re: 43S News

Post by dlachieze » Wed Jun 12, 2019 7:37 pm

Walter wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 5:58 pm
If you think this way, I must reconsider wasting my talent here.
Hey Walter don't take this discussion too seriously ! Did you see the smiley ? There are way more important things in life than keys order on a calculator keyboard ;)
DM42 SN: 00425

burkhard
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2018 9:15 pm

Re: 43S News

Post by burkhard » Wed Jun 12, 2019 9:22 pm

rprosperi wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 1:52 pm

There can be no doubt you started your HP calculator use with a Voyager or Pioneer.

Not judging, just observing.

And though I prefer the earlier layout (since it was perfect after all) it's good IMHO that Jaco laid early groundwork for 43S users that prefer this clealry incorrect layout, for folks that were late to the game.

Well... I guess that does sound a bit like I'm judging after all. :shock: :D
I actually "started" on the HP35 (no "S"!), but indeed most of my serious university use was with a 15C. So I'll give you full credit.

But it's not a question (for me) of "early" or "late" HP layout. I am actually OK with EITHER the "early" or the "late" layout.
What I would really prefer to avoid is a hybrid that is neither... i.e. putting the operators on the left like the "early" ones, but arranging them in the "late" ones' order as is the present WP43S official development path. That I think is a mistake.

In the end though, I have no cause to complain and I'll buy the darned thing no matter what. :D
I'm just going to cringe a bit that neither of the existing two conventions was followed.

rprosperi
Posts: 491
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2017 5:48 pm
Location: New York

Re: 43S News

Post by rprosperi » Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:44 am

burkhard wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 9:22 pm
But it's not a question (for me) of "early" or "late" HP layout. I am actually OK with EITHER the "early" or the "late" layout.
What I would really prefer to avoid is a hybrid that is neither... i.e. putting the operators on the left like the "early" ones, but arranging them in the "late" ones' order as is the present WP43S official development path. That I think is a mistake.

In the end though, I have no cause to complain and I'll buy the darned thing no matter what. :D
I'm just going to cringe a bit that neither of the existing two conventions was followed.
It's not a casual mistake, and I'm sure Walter has a reason, so let's just ask:

@Walter - why is the operator layout for the 43S using the location of the original HP models (left side), while using the sequence of the later models (Div/*/-/+ top to bottom), thus introducing a 3rd standard? Though I'm open to hear your reasoning, I'm inclined to agree with the other folks here and on MoHPC, that staying with one of the proven standards make the most sense. I feel this has been discussed, but could not find it. Of course I know the community voted for the left side, so why not retain the complete standard?

What the world needs least is a 3rd standard here.
--bob p

DM42: β00071 & 00282

User avatar
akaTB
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 11:56 am

Re: 43S News

Post by akaTB » Thu Jun 13, 2019 6:06 am

rprosperi wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:44 am
burkhard wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 9:22 pm
But it's not a question (for me) of "early" or "late" HP layout. I am actually OK with EITHER the "early" or the "late" layout.
What I would really prefer to avoid is a hybrid that is neither... i.e. putting the operators on the left like the "early" ones, but arranging them in the "late" ones' order as is the present WP43S official development path. That I think is a mistake.

In the end though, I have no cause to complain and I'll buy the darned thing no matter what. :D
I'm just going to cringe a bit that neither of the existing two conventions was followed.
It's not a casual mistake, and I'm sure Walter has a reason, so let's just ask:

@Walter - why is the operator layout for the 43S using the location of the original HP models (left side), while using the sequence of the later models (Div/*/-/+ top to bottom), thus introducing a 3rd standard? Though I'm open to hear your reasoning, I'm inclined to agree with the other folks here and on MoHPC, that staying with one of the proven standards make the most sense. I feel this has been discussed, but could not find it. Of course I know the community voted for the left side, so why not retain the complete standard?

What the world needs least is a 3rd standard here.
Let's start here, but there are previous threads on the old forum.
I believe Walter prefers the later arrangement and definitely dislikes the obelus.
In this case, however I concur: better not introduce another arrangement, but I think I will adapt anyway.
Greetings,
    Massimo

-+×÷ left is right and right is wrong :twisted: Casted in gold

User avatar
Walter
Posts: 1062
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 9:13 am
Location: Close to FRA, Germany

Re: 43S News

Post by Walter » Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:23 pm

On your request I've to quote myself (sorry). Please read all of the following - no cherry picking:
Walter wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 9:27 pm
jfb9301 wrote:
Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:39 pm
Why are the operators /*-+ on the left and the exit, up, down... on the right?
As Bob ((Prosperi)) wrote already, this is a religuous topic ;) Nevertheless I'll try to summarice the facts:

All of HP's pocket calculators up to and including the famous HP-41C had the arithmetic operators on the left below ENTER. The Voyagers had to put them on the right for obvious reasons ((placing them in the middle of the keyboard would look really odd)). With the Pioneers, they staid on the right - but ENTER remained on the left. So much about HP's logical ((keyboard layout)) development.

There was a very extensive discussion of this topic on the forum of MoHPC in 2012 IIRC, followed by a poll. After all, many people agreed on ENTER and the 4 operators should be in the same column (for various reasons). And the poll resulted in our decision (we, the developers) to place the 4 operators on the left, backed by a majority of votes IIRC. ((And to intercept legends arising: at said poll, the order of arithmetic operators was as it is today - constant for 7 years. You can verify this easily.))

So, now they are there.
Some additional remarks:
  1. HP abandoned ÷ × + - in 1981, turning to + - × ÷. This latter sequence has a lot more inherent logic than the former. And up to now, nobody (no survivor, no adept) was able to tell the reason for that odd old order of operators. I can't promote a product I'm unable to justify.
    .
  2. Please note we're in 2019, not 1981 anymore. What would people of 2019 say if we'd drop operator order of today for an order of 1972 for no other reason than nostalgia? If you cannot adapt to one change in four decades you're probably petrified already. (BTW: Didn't the USA promise to go metric in 1975? So much about effective application of international standards in the USA. Thus, as an 'old European' I'm always slightly amused when US citizens mention standards [bitter grin]. Get your homework done before clashing another expensive probe on whatever planet.[/rant])
    .
  3. We will stick to the standard order of arithmetic operators as everyone learned, learns, and will learn at school worldwide for good reasons. Promised. But none of us will interfere when you tell your grandkids that there once was another order on some old calculators long ago (Grandpa, you're kidding! Why on earth should they've done it that weird way?!). Promised as well.
Now let the flames begin. We will firefight but stay always open to conviction. Though don't forget who are the developers of this forthcoming device.

P.S.: Massimo's link should point here: https://www.hpmuseum.org/forum/thread-118.html
DM42 SN: 00041 --- Follower of Platon.

HP-35, HP-45, ..., HP-50, WP 34S, WP 31S, DM16L

User avatar
akaTB
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 11:56 am

Re: 43S News

Post by akaTB » Thu Jun 13, 2019 8:01 pm

Walter wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:23 pm
P.S.: Massimo's link should point here: https://www.hpmuseum.org/forum/thread-118.html
Ok, no page 2, but they however, land on one page and show the same info.

All together now: obelus, obelus, obelus... :D
Greetings,
    Massimo

-+×÷ left is right and right is wrong :twisted: Casted in gold

User avatar
TwoWeims
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:29 am
Location: Prescott, AZ

Re: 43S News

Post by TwoWeims » Thu Jun 13, 2019 8:23 pm

I understand that the DM67 is scheduled to be released around the first of April next year.
The old arithmetic key layout will be preserved. ;)
DM42 SN: 3682
HP-15C and HP-16C (Bought originally by me in the 80's)
HP-67 and HP-55
HP-48G
MK-52

dlachieze
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 10:20 am
Location: France

Re: 43S News

Post by dlachieze » Thu Jun 13, 2019 8:33 pm

Walter wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:23 pm
Now let the flames begin. We will firefight but stay always open to conviction. Though don't forget who are the developers of this forthcoming device.
Yes I don't forget who are the developers and I fully appreciate all the work being done. And I know that at the end the decision is in the hands of the developers.

But as you said: now let the flames begin, for the sake of discussion :mrgreen:

Your arguments are interesting as they could apply the same way to the location of the operators :
Walter wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:23 pm
Some additional remarks:
  1. HP abandoned ÷ × + - in 1981, turning to + - × ÷.
They also abandoned the left side in 1981 and moved the operators to the right side :mrgreen:

Walter wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:23 pm
  • Please note we're in 2019, not 1981 anymore. What would people of 2019 say if we'd drop operator order of today for an order of 1972 for no other reason than nostalgia?
So what would they say if we'd drop operators location of today (right) for a location of 1972 (left) for no other reason than nostalgia? :mrgreen:

Walter wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:23 pm
  • We will stick to the standard order of arithmetic operators as everyone learned, learns, and will learn at school worldwide for good reasons. Promised. But none of us will interfere when you tell your grandkids that there once was another order on some old calculators long ago (Grandpa, you're kidding! Why on earth should they've done it that weird way?!).
Don't you think that kids at school worldwide are learning to use calculators with the operators on the right side ? (Grandpa, you're kidding! Why on earth should they've put the operators that weird way on the left?!). :mrgreen:

So if we move the operators to the left as in 1972 we should also keep the 1972 operators order, otherwise the operators should be on the right with the modern operators order. QED. :mrgreen:

Don't take all this too seriously but I think that there will always be opposing discussions between lefties and righties the same way there was between Big-Endians and Little-Endians in the nation of Lilliput :lol:
DM42 SN: 00425

User avatar
H2X
Posts: 419
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:00 am
Location: Norway

Re: 43S News

Post by H2X » Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:48 pm

dlachieze wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 8:33 pm
... Your arguments are interesting as they could apply the same way to the location of the operators...
In that case, don't we need to discuss the layout of the numeric keys as well? Surely they must be laid out like on a mobile phone, like this?

1 2 3
4 5 6
7 8 9

Otherwise people of this day and age would only hurt their brains, wouldn't they? :D
DM42 SN:00040 | Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible - Frank Zappa

ctrclckws
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2019 3:30 pm

Re: 43S News

Post by ctrclckws » Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:32 pm

The phone company chose that because of the letters associated with the keys.

Post Reply