NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/comp/sys/hp48/6594

Text File | 1992-12-31 | 5.8 KB | 116 lines

Newsgroups: comp.sys.hp48
Path: sparky!uunet!nntp.telebit.com!phr
From: [e-mail] (Paul Rubin)
Subject: Re: The "high price" of the HP48!
In-Reply-To: [e-mail]'s message of 31 Dec 1992 09:17:13 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: napa
Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
    <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 20:53:42 GMT
Lines: 101

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Anthony J Stieber) writes:

   In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Paul Rubin) writes:

   >1. Remember the original post said ALL CURRICULA.  This includes art,
   >music, history, literature, etc. as well as engineering.  Computers
   >are becoming important in all these fields--for text formatting
   >if nothing else--but machines like the HP-48 (and even 95LX) are
   >mostly useless in all nontechnical fields.  (Possible exceptions
   >are business, economics, etc.).

   Depends on what you consider to be nontechnical.  I've found a pocket
   computer very useful in psychology and anthropology.  Both of these
   fields can involve a lot data collection and a lot of statistics.  I've
   used a pocket computer to both collect numbers and to crunch them.
   It's much easier to collect and organize data hundreds or even thousands
   of data points in the field or in the lab with a computer then with paper
   and pencil.

Yes I thought of these subjects but didn't mention them to save space.
They are classed as "social science", which includes the word "science"
so I decided to count them as technical.  I agree that field data collection
is one of the few important uses of pocket-sized computers but feel
that a 95LX is superior to a 48 for this purpose.  Among other things,
you can program a 95LX in normal languages.

   The humanities departments at UWM are the biggest users of the Convex
   supercomputer.  This is in part because those departments don't own
   many fast machines (mostly personal computers), however many hard
   science departments (physics, chemistry, etc) use the supercomputer as
   even their own unix systems aren't always fast enough.

If the humanities departments need to use a supercomputer instead of
a PC, then an HP48 is -really- not going to help them much :-)

   >powerful enough.  A 48 still seems to me like a solution looking
   >for a problem.

   Perhaps it isn't suited to your work style, it is well suited to the
   many people who use them.

I'm still waiting to hear about how many uses there are for the 48
that fit all these qualifications:
    - the 48 is better for the purpose than a cheap scientific calculator
    - the 48 is better for the purpose than a a 95LX
    - the 48 is better for the purpose than a full-sized personal computer
    - the user is a typical college student

   >that is less portable.  I haven't tried a 95 with Derive but would
   >be interested to hear how it compares to the 48.

   I've heard that in some ways it's better, in other ways it isn't.
   Some people own both and say the machines complement each other.

If they carry both units around, they are getting up into the weight,
size, and cost range of a subnotebook computer.

   >A 48 seems like a fun toy and I'd buy one if someone offered me one
   >cheap enough, but I feel it is a disservice to most students to
   >suggest that a real computer is not a better investment.

   A minimal "real computer" capable of running Mathmatica runs around
   US$1000.  Mathmatica itself is US$150 for the slow student version, the
   full version is several hundred dollars.  The 48 looks like a really
   great buy considering it has most of the power of Mathmatica and costs
   the nearly the same as or not much more than just the software.
   Because of this even students who do have a computer that can run
   Mathmatic might buy a 48 instead.

You can actually run Mathematica on somewhat less than $1k of hardware
(I know I did), but these figures are not too far off.  However, it's
absurd to say the 48 has most of the power of Mathematica.  There
are other programs that cost less or are free, and need less hardware,
but I'm not directly familiar with them so I didn't compare them.
(I should mention the free Emacs calculator calc.el though, which
I believe is comparable to a 48, though much weaker than Mathematica).
Examples of other programs include Derive, Reduce, Mathcad, Theorist,
Milo, and Macsyma.

  Plus, the 48 is a calculator that students have to buy anyway.

Why do students have to buy a 48 anyway?  Or do you mean they anyway
just have to buy *some* kind of calculator?  Less powerful calculators
are so much less expensive than a 48 that getting these functions
when you buy the other stuff in a 48 is an almost insignificant factor.

   Students not only may not have the money for a more expensive machine,
   they may not have the space.  Typical students do not have their own
   offices on campus, and they may not have any secure place to keep a
   laptop.  A handheld computer can be used nearly anywhere a student can
   study, kept it a pocket when not in use, and costs little to maintain.
   The same can't be said for larger computers.

You can't really put a 48 in a normal sized pocket (one other reason I
resisted buying one).  Notebook computers fit in backpacks though they
are too heavy to want to bring to school every day.  Newer
subnotebooks (Zeos Pocket PC, etc.) are small enough to carry
everywhere and considerably more useful than a 48, though more
expensive.  There is also the 95LX, of course.  (I've resisted buying
a Zeos because I'm waiting for one with a PCMCIA 2.0 slot that
takes Type II expansion cards so I can put in a high speed modem).