Hello. I'm a new hp-50g Owner

[username localhost]

First of all, my background. Prior to this I really only owned a
TI-89. That is a good calculator, and I do like its CAS quite a bit.
I've found that it does a few things better than even MAPLE will. (But
of course, MAPLE does better on many other things)

The HP-50g's symbolic capabilities are not quite as nice as the
TI-89's, for a couple of reasons, one of note being that the 89 was
not trying to be backwards compatible, so as a result nearly
everything was happy to accept symbolic input. The HP-50g comes a bit
short on that. But in its defense, the HP-50g has an enormous number
of cool features that the TI-89 lacks.

I was familiar with RPN in theory, so it was not too hard to become
adjusted but it did take a while.
I have found that i have been installing all of my libraries in port
2. As far as libraries go, I have:
* Keyman+ 5.2004 WR
* extable (actually extable2)
* The equation libraies
* Nosy 4.1 by JNE Bos
* Emacs 2.11a CD&Pivo
* SDiag 2.11 CD
* OPEN FIRE v2.9
* PASSIANS (greyscale card game, using OPEN FIRE)
* APPsman 2.2003 WR & CD
* OT49+ 4.2004 WR

I also have Filer6 and LE42.BIN (LibEx 4.2) installed in port 2.

Emacs was installed using the default keybindings. LS APPS (normally
filer) was reassigned to Filer6 (I used Keyman+ to add TAKEOVER to the
assignment).

My STARTUP file sets -62,-117,-41,-61,-40, and clears -95 (it also
forces a garbage collection)

The main other notable thing about my setup is a GAMES folder, in
which I have the OpenFire Dune version, (and a simple userRPL program
to deal with the save data.), a 10 byte program that launches
MINEHUNT, and a small script to launch the card game.

Is there any way to create a script to automatically launch the
MINEISBETTER tetris game? I would assume that it could be launched
easily enough with the correct pointer, but no such pointer is
included in extable2, nor could i find such a pointer mentioned on
this list.


Does anybody have any comments? Library suggestions, etc?



I've thought about libman, but so far my libraries are not that out of
control.
I've looked at unitman, which looked good, but i don't like the idea
that the whole customized menu gets assigned to the key. I would haver
preferred a design using a specially named variable and assigning a
small constant sized program to the relevant key. It could be a simple
pointer to one of the lib's $HIDDEN programs.

Dr. Wolfgang Rautenberg, why did you choose to assign the whole menu
to the key like that? (You mentioned it could be problematic and
suggesting using bz2 on it in the manual). Is this format merely a
holdover from the HP48 unitman program?

Carsten Dominik, What has happened to development of the emacs
package? I'll admit emacs itself may not need much work, but SDiag is
definately not finished. Looking at the table of contents, there are
entire chapters planned but no implemented.

[A.L.]

On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:59:48 -0000, username localhost

Post by username localhost
everything was happy to accept symbolic input. The HP-50g comes a bit
short on that. But in its defense, the HP-50g has an enormous number
of cool features that the TI-89 lacks.

Cannot be said better. TI-89 is good CALCULATOR, HP-50 is good GADGET.

A.L.

[TW]

Post by A.L.

Post by username localhost
everything was happy to accept symbolic input. The HP-50g comes a bit
short on that. But in its defense, the HP-50g has an enormous number
of cool features that the TI-89 lacks.

Cannot be said better. TI-89 is good CALCULATOR, HP-50 is good GADGET.
A.L.

You do rather enjoy taking and highlighting the most negative part of
every post, don't you? Were the fuzzy bunnies mean to you in your
childhood?

TW

PS - ease of use doesn't equal best for everyone

[Dave Boyd]

Post by TW

Post by A.L.

Post by username localhost
everything was happy to accept symbolic input. The HP-50g comes a bit
short on that. But in its defense, the HP-50g has an enormous number
of cool features that the TI-89 lacks.

Cannot be said better. TI-89 is good CALCULATOR, HP-50 is good GADGET.
A.L.

You do rather enjoy taking and highlighting the most negative part of
every post, don't you? Were the fuzzy bunnies mean to you in your
childhood?

Heh! But on the other hand, he's got an opinion, and he's taken some
flack for it here (not surprisingly given the nature of the forum), and
now, when he sees someone who says something close to part of his
opinion, he sees that as support, and quotes it. All very natural, and
perfectly allowed, right? He's not swearing or anything, and he DOES
own a 50G, and likes some aspects of it.

I happen to agree with part of what he says he likes -- the 50G _is_ a
great gadget. Quality of the math aside:

1) It's way easier for a user to quickly program it once he knows RPL,
the keyboard can be defined any way you like, up to and including
hyper-cryptic 21-things-on-one-key kinds of things;

2) There are a lot of programs to help you customize the UI (thank you,
thank you, Wolfgang Rautenberg! And you too, John H. Meyers! And
Andreas Möller! And any others I neglect here!).

3) It's very quick to get at the things you want once you know where
they are, especially if you use the soft menus.

Also, I agree that the 89 is a great calculator. I happen to think that
the 50G is also, and I suspect that at least some of the people who
prefer one to the other would have different opinions if they'd learned
the other first...

Post by TW
PS - ease of use doesn't equal best for everyone

Neither does ease of learning. But that's what seems to sell.

[A.L.]

Post by Dave Boyd

Post by TW

Post by A.L.

Post by username localhost
everything was happy to accept symbolic input. The HP-50g comes a bit
short on that. But in its defense, the HP-50g has an enormous number
of cool features that the TI-89 lacks.

Cannot be said better. TI-89 is good CALCULATOR, HP-50 is good GADGET.
A.L.

You do rather enjoy taking and highlighting the most negative part of
every post, don't you? Were the fuzzy bunnies mean to you in your
childhood?

Heh! But on the other hand, he's got an opinion, and he's taken some
flack for it here (not surprisingly given the nature of the forum), and
now, when he sees someone who says something close to part of his
opinion, he sees that as support, and quotes it. All very natural, and
perfectly allowed, right? He's not swearing or anything, and he DOES
own a 50G, and likes some aspects of it.

Moreover, I don't consider word "gadget" negative. TI was designed to
do EXACTLY what it was designed for - to do calculations. On HP-50 you
can do MUCH more what does not necessary belong to "calculations"
arena. HP-50 is in priciple a computer, TI-89 is much less.

It can be discussed whether this is good or bad - the same as we can
discuss how good is cell phone with camera and whether it is more cell
phone than camera or opposite

I DO like programming in FORTH-like RPL, what doesn't mean that RPL is
good for everyone. However, it is much more FUN to program in RPL than
in TI Basic. But it is much FASTER to write a program on TI then on
HP, especially for someone who is not necessary computing enthusiast.
This is the reason of (absolutely positive) label "gadget"

A.L.

[Dave Boyd]

A.L. wrote:

<snip A.L. saying that the HP-50G is more of a "gadget" than the TI-89>

Post by A.L.
Moreover, I don't consider word "gadget" negative. TI was designed to
do EXACTLY what it was designed for - to do calculations. On HP-50 you
can do MUCH more what does not necessary belong to "calculations"
arena. HP-50 is in priciple a computer, TI-89 is much less.

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I consider the TI more like a Windows
computer -- quite capable of running apps that someone else has written,
apps which take over the interface. Icons and menus, etc. HP is more
like old command-line UNIX -- lots of small programs that you can hook
together in user-written scripts, or just big command strings.

Post by A.L.
It can be discussed whether this is good or bad - the same as we can
discuss how good is cell phone with camera and whether it is more cell
phone than camera or opposite
I DO like programming in FORTH-like RPL, what doesn't mean that RPL is
good for everyone. However, it is much more FUN to program in RPL than
in TI Basic. But it is much FASTER to write a program on TI then on
HP, especially for someone who is not necessary computing enthusiast.

Hmm. Once you wrap your head around the idioms of stack and list
programming, I think RPL is probably quicker. Longer learning time,
especially for people used to function-style programming, maybe.
Different way of doing things, yes. But it's terse and pretty complete,
so that once you've got a design in your head, the typing should be
quicker. I'm finding that to be true for me, and I've been programming,
mostly in dialects of BASIC, for a living for twenty years, after
learning on the original BASIC for the DecSystem-10.

APL is faster still, or so I understand it -- I'll probably never learn
the real APL with the special keyboard -- and its proponents talk of
doing amazing things with a small, well-chosen string of symbols.

[Graywolf]

Yes, I too was bitterly disappointed by the HP-50g's CAS. I think I
should have stuck with the 89 a little longer...

Sorry, I don't know much about scripting/programming the 50g. You
might want to install a backup utility, a configuration saver, or a
CAS command help library (if you are unfamiliar with some commands).

[netsez]

Post by Graywolf
Yes, I too was bitterly disappointed by the HP-50g's CAS. I think I
should have stuck with the 89 a little longer...

I haven't used the 89, can you tell us what makes its CAS better?

Thanks

[Graywolf]

Well, I had been using the 89 for three years compared to 3 months of
the HP 50g. I find that the CAS on the 89 is *overall* better than the
50g. Let's see, here are some few points that I can remember off the
top of my head:

1. The symbolic solver on the 89 is WAY better than the HP. The HP is
limited to rational expressions and elementary trancedental functions.
The TI can adquetly handle polynomial expressions, logarithms
(completely unlike HP), trigonometric functions (completely unlike
HP), e and pi functions, and a few others I cannot remember. The point
is, the 89 will try to solve everything you throw at it symbolically,
and if it can't, it will give you a numerical answer. I find that if
an equation has a symbolic answer, the 89 WILL be able to solve it and
will not give up like the HP if it doesn't simplify to a rational
expression.

2. Symbolic integration (definite and indefinite) on 89 is better
than HP. I can't say much more about that. There were a couple of
integrals I had written down, and if I find them, I will post them.

3. Simplification on the 89 is vastly better than that of the HP. I
know this is a point of contention because some people want internal
simplification whereas others do not. For example, entering sin(pi/2-
x) onto the 89 will return cos(x) whereas the HP will leave it
unchanged. Of course, you can go to the TRIG menu and rewrite it in
many different ways. I find that this is burdensome and the CAS has no
option to do this internally. Also, sometimes I expect a command to
change everything into sin() or cos(), but it doesn't so I have to
semi-randomly try functions to get an answer that I can write down on
paper.

4. The 89's CAS trys to be consistent (note I didn't say it was
always) whereas the HP will constantly ask you to switch modes and not
switch to the previous ones after a calculation. I think everyone
knows this already and I'm sure there are programs for this, but I
don't want to take the time to download them ;) , I can do it manually
(but it's still a pain).

5. I find that the TI is better at calculating limits using the
limit() command on the 89 and the lim() command on the HP. The series
command is so-so, sometimes it evaluates a limit, otherwise it
returns ? which I take means "undefined" or "I can't do it".

6. This is contentious: the 89 is better at summation and products. I
find that the HP sometimes returns summations as psi(a)-psi(b). This
is good that the HP is making use of it's built-in commands, but for
something like the sum of reciprocals, I sometimes want the fractional
answer. And "arrow Q" function doesn't help for large fractions. And
infinite summation is very weak on the HP. Also, I haven't been able
to find a product command like the 89's capital PI command. (I haven't
looked in the manual yet...)

7. Factoring, generally, is better on the 89 because of speed.
Nothing much to say here, it's not a major issue because both will
probably handle whatever you throw at them.

8. This might be simplification or maybe not, but it's your call: the
89 always tries to resolve everything in symbolics in Exact mode. The
HP, on the other hand, will ask for mode switches. For example, the 89
can evaluate sin(pi/5) whereas the HP can't (symbolically).

This is all that pops into mind right now... All of the above is in my
opinion so HP fans and TI fans, do not take offense. All I can say is
that the 89 has a superior CAS mainly because it is a mini version of
Derive.

[Graywolf]

BTW: the above post was in reply to netsez's request.

[A.L.]

On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 17:00:09 -0000, Graywolf

Post by Graywolf
This is all that pops into mind right now... All of the above is in my
opinion so HP fans and TI fans, do not take offense. All I can say is
that the 89 has a superior CAS mainly because it is a mini version of
Derive.

Symbolic polynomial root finder in TI-89 implements Buhberger's
algorithm that is using Groebner's Basis - quite powerfull tool.

A.L.

[netsez]

Post by Graywolf
Well, I had been using the 89 for three years compared to 3 months of
the HP 50g. I find that the CAS on the 89 is *overall* better than the
50g. Let's see, here are some few points that I can remember off the

Wow that is a huge list! Does anyone with an HP have a rebuttal?

[Zeno]

Post by netsez

Post by Graywolf
Well, I had been using the 89 for three years compared to 3 months of
the HP 50g. I find that the CAS on the 89 is *overall* better than the
50g. Let's see, here are some few points that I can remember off the

Wow that is a huge list! Does anyone with an HP have a rebuttal?

The HP50G blows away the TI-89 Titanium in Linear algebra...

The TI50G with a native ARM matrix dividng program can solve 120
simultaneous equaitons of 120 unknowns each in 2 minutes 45 seconds

I doubt the 89 can even solve it, and if it could, it would talke a
loooooooong time.

[A.L.]

Post by Zeno

Post by netsez

Post by Graywolf
Well, I had been using the 89 for three years compared to 3 months of
the HP 50g. I find that the CAS on the 89 is *overall* better than the
50g. Let's see, here are some few points that I can remember off the

Wow that is a huge list! Does anyone with an HP have a rebuttal?

The HP50G blows away the TI-89 Titanium in Linear algebra...
The TI50G with a native ARM matrix dividng program can solve 120
simultaneous equaitons of 120 unknowns each in 2 minutes 45 seconds

Uhum. And you enter 120x120 matrix manually from keyboard.

This is like in old cartoon from New Yorker: Two ladies and a guy
sitting in living room. Guy is sitting in armchair, keeps a newspaper
in right hand. Left hand, with large (and probably expensive) watch is
immersed into aquarium. One lady says to the other one: "My husband
doesn't like spending monies on unneeded features".

120x120 matrix benchmark for a calculator is plain nonsense.

A.L.

[Graywolf]

OK. I'm sure the 89 can't do 120x120 equation solving that fast, but I
think most people shouldn't be worried about that (because the average
person hardly needs to solve over 4 unknowns). I know that the 50g
hardware is superior to the 89 so arithmetic should be faster, but I
also have heard that the CAS is emulated so it doesn't take full
advatage of the speed. I have heard the HP is good for linear algebra
and I admit it is true, but the 89 is not incompetent. The 89 just
lacks roughly 10-15% of the benefits.

And the list isn't too long; it grows (and I'm not bashing HP here, I
can say a lot of positive things about the 50g):

9. The 89 has "smart" equating features (this is mildly contestable).
For example, you can enter (x^2-4)/(x+2)=x-2 and the 89 will return
true. On the HP, you would type the exact same thing, except it would
be seperated by ==. The HP would return 1 (true). However, the HP
breaks down very fast (I don't know why) because it will not equate
sin(pi/2-x) with cos(x) as the 89 will. Furthermore, the HP lacks
advanced absolute value and inequality support.

10. The HP has weaker complex numerical support. I don't have an 89
with me (stolen :( ) so I can't give examples, but from the manual I
still have I can tell that the HP has a difficult time integrating
complex functions. This is also true with some of the other calculus
functions such as TAYLOR.

It's nearly 10:00 PM here so I'm going to sleep now. I'll try to find
more gaps in the HP CAS tomorrow.

[Graywolf]

Just to correct a statement earlier, the 89 can't even solve anything
that large because it will run out of internal memory (it's severly
restricted by that), but again it's something 99.99% of people won't
have to worry about.

[netsez]

Post by Graywolf
And the list isn't too long; it grows (and I'm not bashing HP here, I

What are some of the things you prefer on the 50g?

[Graywolf]

Let's see, here are just some:

- I like the "smart" filer; you can have subdirectories
- Lots of math functions (like GAMMA) so no need to download them
- Very strong casing and screen cover
- Lots of connectivity options
- An SD slot for almost unlimited memory
- An efficient matrix builder
- Built-in equation writer for complex equations
- Lots of options for rewriting expressions
- Very fast integer calculations (including arbitary precision)

And I can keep going on. Here are things I like about the HP over the
89:

89: Casing is not strong and the screen collects dust.
HP: Casing is very strong and screen hardly collects dust.
89: Entering matrices is a pain using editor or Home screen.
HP: Entering matrices is easy with the matrix editor.
89: You run out of memory fast when installing games, pgrograms, etc.
HP: An SD slot takes care of all your memory needs.
89: Slow when calculating 249! and arbitary precision.
HP: Very fast when calculating even 400! and arbitary precision.
89: Answers are displayed only in one default format.
HP: You can rewrite expressions to your heart's content.
89: You have to dowload extra programs for extra math functions.
HP: Lots (but not all) of math functions are already built-in.
89: There is only one operating mode: Alebraic.
HP: There are two operating modes: RPN/Algebraic.
89: Entering long expressions is pain when worrying about parentheses.
HP: RPN or EQW make long expressions easy to type.
89: You must select lower/upper bound when find roots from a graph.
HP: Just place your cursor next to the root and HP tells you the
value.
89: You cannot customize the calculator to your preferences.
HP: You can customize your calculator to your preferences.

That's all I can think of right now. While I'm talking about this, I
will mention my ideal calculator (or dream calculator):

- Casing like the HP and a screen like the HP.
- Screen resolution like the 89 and keys and cursor like the 89.
- Key configuration similar to the 89.
- Algebraic mode should have same GUI/interface as 89.
- RPN mode should be similar to the HP RPN mode.
- EQW is present and built-in.
- HP matrix editor is built-in.
- 89 CAS with HP math and rewriting commands.
- Graphing abilities are the same as 89.
- Graphing ease-of-use is same as HP (i.e. cursor near = roots).
- HP Equation library built-in.
- 89 Stats/List Editor built-in.
- Other HP applications and TI applications built-in.
- An SD card slot and a USB port (see usb8x).
- An infrared port for calculator-to-calculator transmission.
- A filer easy to use like 89, but features of HP.
- Support for arbitary precision.
- Support for values from -999E-9999 to 999E9999.

That's all I can think of for now.

[Zeno]

Post by A.L.

Post by Zeno

Post by netsez

Post by Graywolf
Well, I had been using the 89 for three years compared to 3 months of
the HP 50g. I find that the CAS on the 89 is *overall* better than the
50g. Let's see, here are some few points that I can remember off the

Wow that is a huge list! Does anyone with an HP have a rebuttal?

The HP50G blows away the TI-89 Titanium in Linear algebra...
The TI50G with a native ARM matrix dividng program can solve 120
simultaneous equaitons of 120 unknowns each in 2 minutes 45 seconds

Uhum. And you enter 120x120 matrix manually from keyboard.
This is like in old cartoon from New Yorker: Two ladies and a guy
sitting in living room. Guy is sitting in armchair, keeps a newspaper
in right hand. Left hand, with large (and probably expensive) watch is
immersed into aquarium. One lady says to the other one: "My husband
doesn't like spending monies on unneeded features".
120x120 matrix benchmark for a calculator is plain nonsense.
A.L.

Its a example to show the realtive speed comparison....they comparison
is valid for smaller examples of course.

As to inputing the 120 by 120 matrix by hand, nope, i let the random
matirx function do that.

[Zeno]

Post by username localhost
Does anybody have any comments? Library suggestions, etc?

The "fatcal" calendar program available from www.hpcalc.org is a great
calendar program. Its simple, and to the point. A nice example of
something that is simple, yet elegant, and gets the job done. no
clutyter, just good meat to it. One of its features is to put the
number of the month on the stack, then put the year, and it briongs up
that calenddar. Simple, to the point, good programming.