Calculator bit the dust..... 17

[knelli]

Hi all,
I am on my third TI-85 and the display is failing . I looked at other TI models including the TI-83, TI-84 Plus C SE and TI-89 Titanium. I was able to emulate those models on my phone to see if I'd like them. I still prefer the TI-85, and really want something that does conversions easily. I found the conversion programs on the above models to be cumbersome.

What I would like a calculator to do:
I like a large display and history (like TI-85)
trig and scientific functions
x^2 button square root
^ button so I can do whatever root I need (like x^(1/4))
Conversions, including ft^2 to acre and gal to ft^3 (love the conv menu on the TI-85)
solve quadratic/simultaneous equations easily

It would be nice to have something to do decimal to fraction or add feet and inches and give answer in fraction form.

Should I get an old TI-86? Do they have better longevity than the TI-85?

I do like the RealCalc app for android. Anyone know if it is based on a calculator model?

Anyone have the TI36x Pro? CANON F-792SGA? Looks like the TI36x pro conversions are very limited.

I know a lot of you like the HP with RPN, but I'm not looking to go that route.

 

[EngineeringEric]

Excel, on this TI89 your equation was only (6) strokes
3 + 4 * 3 enter... seems close

 

[Archie264]

Eric,

Ok, now try 3 x (4+3) on your TI. With RPN it's still 6 strokes.

 

[dik]

RPN was OK in it's day... I use an HP48GX at home and a TI89Titanium at the office... used to be the stack architecture of the HP machines was the fastest... not necessarily anymore... my TI89 has a Motorola 68000 processor in it... OK for a handheld. Archie... whether it's 6 strokes or 7... at the end of the exercise, I have a clean display showing 3 x (4+3)... so at least I know what I entered... rather than have just the answer...

Dik

 

[Archie264]

...but no intermediate results...

 

[EngineeringEric]

Archie, But why add unnecessary parenthesis if not needed . The TI knows order of operations... now the earlier 5wl^4/384EI will cause problems on the TI without parenthesis. But I did recently get a RPN to try out, the 89 does have a clean algebraic display when complete, similar to MathCAD... but only two lines

 

[msquared48]

So now we have proof. HP users do it with fewer strokes.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

 

[IDS]

I'm not trying to convert anyone here, I'm just wondering if there is anybody else who doesn't see the point of using a calculator when you have a computer with a spreadsheet program sitting on your desk?

Doug Jenkins
Interactive Design Services

http://newtonexcelbach.wordpress.com/

 

[CELinOttawa]

Well Doug, I for one still use the calculator a lot... For some stuff it is simply faster to not drop the pencil, and look only a few inches away rather than completely change focus...

I suspect this one may divide down the lines of type of engineer and type of work.

 

[IDS]

Well Doug, I for one still use the calculator a lot... For some stuff it is simply faster to not drop the pencil, and look only a few inches away rather than completely change focus...

That's why I use the computer (with "not pick up the pencil" substituted for "not drop the pencil")

I suspect this one may divide down the lines of type of engineer and type of work.

Probably, the mechanical guys here seem much more computer oriented than the structurals.

But as with all these debates, the important thing is not the tools you use, but the way you use them.

I'm reminded of a presentation that I went to recently, by Prof. Michael Collins, who attributes the loss of feeling for gross order of magnitude errors to the replacement of the slide rule by the calculator, rather than the introduction of desk-top computers.

Doug Jenkins
Interactive Design Services

http://newtonexcelbach.wordpress.com/

 

[dik]

M^2... where's the fun in that?

Dik

 

[jayrod12]

Msquared, the hp users' wives must be devastated!

 

[Archie264]

Engineering Eric,

Not to beat this dead horse too much but I think you might have missed my point there. If you type those numbers I posted into an algebraic calculator without using parentheses or the memory feature I think you’ll get the wrong answer.

 

[XR250]

@ MSquared:

You should make some shirts

 

[Archie264]

...but I don't think it'll be us HP guys that buy them...

 

[XR250]

I guess it certainly would not help your social life

 

[SLTA]

oh how quickly we degenerate...

 

[EngineeringEric]

Archie, I understood your intent. I guess with the TI89 it knows order of operations. So you do not require the parenthesis... If are comparing a simple aleg. calc to RPN sure but not a complex TI89 to RPN (The 89 does partial deferential equations for those that want it).

I wonder if that shirt would be more popular than the "keep calm, the Structural Engineer is here" post from last week?

 

[msquared48]

You can lead a horse to water, but they still stink.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

 

[Archie264]

I guess I'm missing something. How could you enter both of these equation into an algebraic calculator without using parenthesis and get the correct results?

3 + (4x3)

3 x (4+3)

Rather, I would think that your calculator would revert to the hierarchy of operations and return 15 in both cases instead of 21 in the second case. Now if it was done in two separate operations, that I could see. But then the dastardly keystroke count goes up and we know what a danger that poses to civilization.

 

[EngineeringEric]

Archie,
I missed your " now try 3*(4+3)". you are correct my friend. both return 15 not 21 if no parenthesis are used. touché