I know. IF they make it, I'm in for two.
DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!
Re: DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!
I saw it, hence my also including one further down in my response. I view this particular topic as having as much connection with reality as the "what would you do if you won the lottery?" question that was recently asked quite a bit in my area. While the conversation may occasionally include nuggets of serious thought, it is mostly limited to idle fantasy.
For what it's worth, you're interpretation of my opinion is slightly off -- without knowing a cost, how could I possibly have an opinion of its value? It is my opinion that the current key configuration of the DM42 would require significant compromises to a DM48 implementation, and as such would likely require a different physical implementation to make it into a platform that I would be pleased to use. Thus, higher price to offset startup costs. Is it worth it? I have no opinion without knowing what the actual price would be. If it was worth it for the DM42, only Michael and David could determine if repeating parts of that process for some fantasy DM48 would be justified.
Perhaps if I had actually won the lottery, I would contact SM directly to inquire about how much funding they would need to build my preferred calculator. Then again, I'd actually need to play, which my more pragmatic inclination precludes me from doing.
Re: DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!
I guess your interpretation of my opinion is slightly off as well. Regardless of the actual cost, I think a DM48 isn't worth the effort: in the size of the DM42 it would be crippled by the missing row of keys, and with one row of keys more it would exceed pocket size. And eventually it would be RPL, so it won't appeal to me anyway. I stick to RPN, 8-level stack.DavidM wrote: ↑Sat Oct 27, 2018 4:45 pmFor what it's worth, you're interpretation of my opinion is slightly off -- without knowing a cost, how could I possibly have an opinion of its value? It is my opinion that the current key configuration of the DM42 would require significant compromises to a DM48 implementation, and as such would likely require a different physical implementation to make it into a platform that I would be pleased to use. Thus, higher price to offset startup costs. Is it worth it? I have no opinion without knowing what the actual price would be. If it was worth it for the DM42, only Michael and David could determine if repeating parts of that process for some fantasy DM48 would be justified.
WP43 SN00000, 34S, and 31S for obvious reasons; HP-35, 45, ..., 35S, 15CE, DM16L S/N# 00093, DM42β SN:00041
Re: DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!
Have no fear, Walter, your opinions about larger-than-Pioneer calculators and RPL have been clearly visible to me (and probably most others) for quite some time. That you don't believe it's worth the effort is a foregone conclusion that even a casual participant should be able to reach.
Every user brings their own needs, experience, and "comfort zones" to bear in these type of discussions. For me personally, I prefer the RPL approach over the register-based keystroke programming of the earlier models (and yes, I owned and used a 41 for many years before switching). But that's just an opinion, no better or worse than yours, just different. In the same fashion, I've never carried a calculator in any pocket, nor do I expect I ever would (I simply don't have that need). I'm actually far more concerned about usability when I have it in my hand(s). At this stage of my life, smaller isn't necessarily better if I can't read the labels. We all have different needs -- finding the "sweet spot" of form and function for a diverse audience isn't easy, but it's impossible if that audience doesn't share its impressions.
Re: DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!
As we do. And BTW, opticians make really good glasses on this side of the great pond.DavidM wrote: ↑Sat Oct 27, 2018 8:09 pmAt this stage of my life, smaller isn't necessarily better if I can't read the labels. We all have different needs -- finding the "sweet spot" of form and function for a diverse audience isn't easy, but it's impossible if that audience doesn't share its impressions.
WP43 SN00000, 34S, and 31S for obvious reasons; HP-35, 45, ..., 35S, 15CE, DM16L S/N# 00093, DM42β SN:00041
Re: DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!
I dunno; as a short-sighted glasses wearer, I don't really want reading glasses to use a calculator, and have to keep swapping glasses, nor do I like the ideal of varifocals (although to be fair I've not tried them). It's driving me nuts the last year or so of having to move my glasses up onto my head when I operate the calculator and back down when I want to read the forum here, back and forth.Walter wrote: ↑Sat Oct 27, 2018 9:56 pmAs we do. And BTW, opticians make really good glasses on this side of the great pond.DavidM wrote: ↑Sat Oct 27, 2018 8:09 pmAt this stage of my life, smaller isn't necessarily better if I can't read the labels. We all have different needs -- finding the "sweet spot" of form and function for a diverse audience isn't easy, but it's impossible if that audience doesn't share its impressions.
Back on topic, I had assumed one of the reasons for the popularity of the DM42 was the difficulty of getting a real 42S at a reasonable price (not that the DM42 is cheap), and its performance, ease of data transfer, upgrade, etc.
Perhaps, if you're willing to consider a 50g as similar to a 48, it's a lot easier to get hold of a real one; indeed I've just bought two new 50g from Oxford Educational. SD card for transfer & update, faster, etc, etc. And an active newRPL.
I bought a DM42, but I'd not see a need to buy a DM48 given I've got a 50g.
edit: I do see that some might prefer the form-factor of the 48, over the 50g. I might, too
I like my DM42, although the keys that don't work every time is annoying, in a brand-new device, but never mind.
Cambridge, UK
41CL/DM41X 12/15C/16C DM15/16 17B/II/II+ 28S 42S/DM42 32SII 48GX 50g 35s WP34S PrimeG2 WP43S/pilot
Casio, Rockwell 18R
41CL/DM41X 12/15C/16C DM15/16 17B/II/II+ 28S 42S/DM42 32SII 48GX 50g 35s WP34S PrimeG2 WP43S/pilot
Casio, Rockwell 18R
-
- Posts: 1107
- Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 5:48 pm
- Location: Netherlands
- Contact:
Re: DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!
Try them!cdmackay wrote: ↑Sun Oct 28, 2018 12:46 amI dunno; as a short-sighted glasses wearer, I don't really want reading glasses to use a calculator, and have to keep swapping glasses, nor do I like the ideal of varifocals (although to be fair I've not tried them). It's driving me nuts the last year or so of having to move my glasses up onto my head when I operate the calculator and back down when I want to read the forum here, back and forth.
I got varifocals (or "progressive lenses" as they call them around here) about a year ago, and I like them. They do take some getting used to, but they're better than having to take your glasses off and put them back on all the time.
I also got a pair of "computer glasses" at the same time; those are glasses that have the same focal length across the entire field of vision, but made to give perfect focus at the typical distance between your eyes and your computer monitor, while sitting at a typical office desk.
I wear the computer glasses at work, and the progressives everywhere else. I would prefer not needing glasses, of course, but I'm a lot happier with this arrangement than I was with my old glasses.
Re: DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!
thanks Thomas, yup, I should get my glasses upgraded, thanks for the hint
Cambridge, UK
41CL/DM41X 12/15C/16C DM15/16 17B/II/II+ 28S 42S/DM42 32SII 48GX 50g 35s WP34S PrimeG2 WP43S/pilot
Casio, Rockwell 18R
41CL/DM41X 12/15C/16C DM15/16 17B/II/II+ 28S 42S/DM42 32SII 48GX 50g 35s WP34S PrimeG2 WP43S/pilot
Casio, Rockwell 18R
Re: DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!
Hi everyone,
I am one of the RPL lovers… I have a broken HP-48GX (its keyboard decided to take an early retirement) and a HP-48GII.
I purchased a DM42 because although the HP-48GII it’s a powerful calculator, it has very low construction quality, its keyboard is awful (miss a lot of keystroke) and batteries last nothing, even if you don’t use the calculator.
The point is that if Swissmicros launch a DM48 surely, I’ll buy one, but I think that it is not necessary. DM42 it’s a powerful and high-quality calculator and with two software improvements (implemented as an optional features) it could be the perfect calculator (for me, of course).
Here are my wishes:
Greetings.
Gop.
I am one of the RPL lovers… I have a broken HP-48GX (its keyboard decided to take an early retirement) and a HP-48GII.
I purchased a DM42 because although the HP-48GII it’s a powerful calculator, it has very low construction quality, its keyboard is awful (miss a lot of keystroke) and batteries last nothing, even if you don’t use the calculator.
The point is that if Swissmicros launch a DM48 surely, I’ll buy one, but I think that it is not necessary. DM42 it’s a powerful and high-quality calculator and with two software improvements (implemented as an optional features) it could be the perfect calculator (for me, of course).
Here are my wishes:
- Larger (>10 registers)/infinite stack or, at least, an option to disable the T register copy to lower level when the stack drops (top copy on pop). Yeah, it can be a useful feature but, for me, it’s annoying (I’m used to working with infinite stack).
- Change the behavior of ENTER key, from classical RPN to Entry RPN (https://hansklav.home.xs4all.nl/rpn/index.html#G) so the enter key doesn’t duplicate a number on the stack).
Greetings.
Gop.
Re: DM 48 .... WHY NOT ?!!!
AFAIK, both wishes would affect Free42. They would make Free42 operating more RPL-like and I'm uncertain whether this is an advantage or the opposite.gopper wrote: ↑Thu Mar 07, 2019 3:45 pm
- Larger (>10 registers)/infinite stack or, at least, an option to disable the T register copy to lower level when the stack drops (top copy on pop). Yeah, it can be a useful feature but, for me, it’s annoying (I’m used to working with infinite stack).
I don’t know if these hypothetical changes should affect to free42s or DM42 firmware… but, with them, I’m sure that DM42 will be more attractive for RPL enthusiasm.
- Change the behavior of ENTER key, from classical RPN to Entry RPN (https://hansklav.home.xs4all.nl/rpn/index.html#G) so the enter key doesn’t duplicate a number on the stack).
Just for curiosity: What do you want to do with >10 (e.g. 12) registers on the stack?
WP43 SN00000, 34S, and 31S for obvious reasons; HP-35, 45, ..., 35S, 15CE, DM16L S/N# 00093, DM42β SN:00041