Technology
Thursday, 21. September 2006, 07:29:26
As a former Math teacher, I'm always interersted in calculators. I have ... well, must be 25-30 of them, though a few no longer work.
I remember when the HP-41C was considered "top of the line". It really wasn't all that special in today's terms, it had memory for up to 63 numbers, though some of that memory could be converted to usage for programs. In real terms, that comes out to 441 bytes. Today your typical scientific calculator can do most of what that could ... and of course at a fraction of the price.
In fact, that's what prompted this. I have just found a calculator which has some features I've previously only seen in models costing $100 (US), and this one costs $18.
I can't show "proper" math here, the forum doesn't support MATHML or something similar, but this calculator can do that to a certain degree. It can write fractions and square roots and exponents (okay, I can do exponents here), and it can display its answers with fractions and square roots in them. Okay, something like the TI-89 or the HP-48G can do some things this won't - but those both cost over $100. And this will fit in your pocket.
By now you're asking "Okay, but what is it?" It's a Casio fx-115ES. Actually, I have a hard time saying that, back when I was teaching the Casio models were somewhat behind the similar Sharp and TI models, to me this is like a "quantum leap" over what they were then - and over the competition.
But ... there's something to be said for the old ways too. When this calculator is set to "MathIO" mode, you have to use the cursor keys to make sure everything is in the right context. You can't just type "SQRT 3 / 4" (where SQRT represents the square root key) because it isn't clear whether the editor should put the division sign inside the square root or outside. I'm familiar with that sort of system from my more expensive calculators (and some computer programs), your typical high school kid will probably be completely lost. Well, for a while anyway.
A conscession to the old ways then - yes, you can set this into standard "LinearIO" mode, but if you do then it displays answers like any of the other calculators. When you're in MathIO mode, you can enter something like "SQRT 8" and it will display an answer of 2 SQRT 2. It can simplify square roots and rationalize denominators (as long as the numbers aren't too large), in LinearIO mode you'll just get the decimal 2.828427...
Of course, to be able to display stuff like that you need a graphical display, it looks to me like the display here is 100x31 pixels. But though it has a graphical display, it does not graph formulas.
This model can also do integration and derivatives (numerically, of course) and has an equation solver, though the prior version also had that. Other new features include an actual table editor for statistical data (though the table is limited to a total of 80 values), and vector and matrix calculations (up to 3x3).
Would I recommend it? I don't know. If you're an engineer or some other professional, you probably need one of those $100+ models. If you're a high school student, it may be too hard to learn - at first anyway. If you're a college student studying to be an engineer, well then you need what an enginner needs. Though then again, there may be times when that $100 calculator is just too big, and you need something handier. So I'm not going to say no, but it shouldn't be your primary calculator. Oh, and I suppose that high school student could put it into LinearIO mode and use it as if it were a standard 2-line calculator, until he or she does get the hang of MathIO mode. If you're going to be working with vectors and matrices, then it would still be worthwhile.
But I'm still amazed by it. I know technology has progressed a lot since I taught math (10 years ago), but other than the 2-line display and the "multiline replay", there really haven't been many changes in the low end scientific calculators.
I wonder what they'll look like 10 years from now?
I remember when the HP-41C was considered "top of the line". It really wasn't all that special in today's terms, it had memory for up to 63 numbers, though some of that memory could be converted to usage for programs. In real terms, that comes out to 441 bytes. Today your typical scientific calculator can do most of what that could ... and of course at a fraction of the price.
In fact, that's what prompted this. I have just found a calculator which has some features I've previously only seen in models costing $100 (US), and this one costs $18.
I can't show "proper" math here, the forum doesn't support MATHML or something similar, but this calculator can do that to a certain degree. It can write fractions and square roots and exponents (okay, I can do exponents here), and it can display its answers with fractions and square roots in them. Okay, something like the TI-89 or the HP-48G can do some things this won't - but those both cost over $100. And this will fit in your pocket.
By now you're asking "Okay, but what is it?" It's a Casio fx-115ES. Actually, I have a hard time saying that, back when I was teaching the Casio models were somewhat behind the similar Sharp and TI models, to me this is like a "quantum leap" over what they were then - and over the competition.
But ... there's something to be said for the old ways too. When this calculator is set to "MathIO" mode, you have to use the cursor keys to make sure everything is in the right context. You can't just type "SQRT 3 / 4" (where SQRT represents the square root key) because it isn't clear whether the editor should put the division sign inside the square root or outside. I'm familiar with that sort of system from my more expensive calculators (and some computer programs), your typical high school kid will probably be completely lost. Well, for a while anyway.
A conscession to the old ways then - yes, you can set this into standard "LinearIO" mode, but if you do then it displays answers like any of the other calculators. When you're in MathIO mode, you can enter something like "SQRT 8" and it will display an answer of 2 SQRT 2. It can simplify square roots and rationalize denominators (as long as the numbers aren't too large), in LinearIO mode you'll just get the decimal 2.828427...
Of course, to be able to display stuff like that you need a graphical display, it looks to me like the display here is 100x31 pixels. But though it has a graphical display, it does not graph formulas.
This model can also do integration and derivatives (numerically, of course) and has an equation solver, though the prior version also had that. Other new features include an actual table editor for statistical data (though the table is limited to a total of 80 values), and vector and matrix calculations (up to 3x3).
Would I recommend it? I don't know. If you're an engineer or some other professional, you probably need one of those $100+ models. If you're a high school student, it may be too hard to learn - at first anyway. If you're a college student studying to be an engineer, well then you need what an enginner needs. Though then again, there may be times when that $100 calculator is just too big, and you need something handier. So I'm not going to say no, but it shouldn't be your primary calculator. Oh, and I suppose that high school student could put it into LinearIO mode and use it as if it were a standard 2-line calculator, until he or she does get the hang of MathIO mode. If you're going to be working with vectors and matrices, then it would still be worthwhile.
But I'm still amazed by it. I know technology has progressed a lot since I taught math (10 years ago), but other than the 2-line display and the "multiline replay", there really haven't been many changes in the low end scientific calculators.
I wonder what they'll look like 10 years from now?
I've never learnt how to use a calculator. Other than the basics I wouldn't have a clue what the rest of it does.
By Rapunzel, # 21. September 2006, 08:42:14
By BigWop, # 18. September 2007, 03:43:19
By robertbj, # 15. April 2008, 14:37:48
Graphing calculators, my favorites are the HP-38G, the TI 83 and 89, and the Casio 9800GB (which graphs in 3 different colors).
The oldest graphing calculator that I currently own is a TI-85 which I bought while in college, I also had an HP-48G for a long time but that finally died two years ago and I replaced it with an HP-50G.
While still useful, the TI-85 definitely shows its age in terms of interface design. I don't have a TI-86 (their freindlier version of a TI-85), but it should be a good system .,.
No, the HP-38G was grossly underrated though. It came out years ago and has a very friendly interface in some ways comparable to the TI-89's. It sold for less than a TI-85 though some of its math functions were more advanced. It actually includes symbolic math, like taking the derivative or solving for a variable, which TI didn't have until the TI-92 (and later TI-89). But try to find any mention of that until about page 200 of the manual ...
My only real problem with HP calculators is that they still only support 12 digit answers. They actually calculate with about 15 digits internally, but all results are rounded to 12 digits for storage. Other calculators keep all their digits - they may only display 12 digits, but they actually store 15 (and the TI-85 and TI-89 display 16 and store 18 or thereabouts). (As a mathematician, I hate re-rounding answers. Displaying only 12 digits is fine, but keep every digit you have.)
By sgunhouse, # 15. April 2008, 22:22:18