The 48G was a really good calculator, but only after loading additional software. The HP50g that came much later is better in every respect, except possibly for the smaller "ENTER" key (and people used to 48G will have to change some habits and possibly redefine some keys…).
Incidentally, many young people (yes, I know how that sounds) do not know how useful a good engineering calculator can be and do not want to learn how to use one. They are missing out. Yes, there is a steep learning curve, but the rewards are significant if you do any amount of calculation in your hobby or work. No, this is not replaced by typing "python" (or "bc", or anything else, really) at your command prompt.
Also incidentally, the development of good engineering calculators pretty much died. HP Prime is largely a school-pleasing toy, HP would down their calculator division a long time ago, and nobody else produces anything good. It's kind of like with gyms: what you get is what the market wants, and since the market doesn't know much, you get gyms full of useless exercise machines, because that's what people think a good gym should have. Similarly with calculators: you get stupid "modern" graphing calculators which are useless for actual work (it takes forever to use them to calculate useful things, and graphing is much better done on a computer), but they look great and sell well.
I admire the project, although I would probably have taken a different path (emulation) to get the biggest effect with the smallest possible effort :-)
I wish there was a good HP50G emulator for iOS — there used to be one, but it was abandoned (contact me if you want to develop it and would like to get the source code, it was under the GPL and I got it from the author).
I'm one of the last people at my workplace to use a calculator. I'm a scientist, not an engineer, so I use a scientific calculator. ;-)
The schools ruined calculators.
I still find a calculator handy, even when I've already got Python going on my PC. It's easier to use the calculator with one hand, especially in the workshop. You can get a Casio solar at Target for 10 bucks.
My wife really prefers RPN, so I gave her my last HP when hers died.
I guess the lack of workshops made also calculators disappear.
> No, this is not replaced by typing "python" (or "bc", or anything else, really) at your command prompt.
Why?
Built in algebra system. Mathematica is nice. Also very expensive.
For those of us that used those calculators in engineering class, the math that is displayed by the calculator also looks like what's in the textbook, making it easy to check if one has entered the right thing in the calculator.
Here's a simple example from their documentation: https://education.ti.com/en/customer-support/knowledge-base/...
Using the Python repl doesn't display nice math as far as I know (let me know if there's a way to make it so it), as you'd have in an environment for doing symbolic math (eg. https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=integrate+sin+x+dx+from... )
Another thing if I remember correctly one could do is something like 3_ft*3_ft>_m^2 to convert 9 square feet in square meters, and do things like keep units throughout a calculation as a quick check that the calculator input is sane.
Take a look at Sage (for PCs) and khikas (for calculators).
Do you mean KhiCAS?
Yes.
Thank you for putting in a good word for "real" calculators. My HP-15c is always within reach.
Solid list of basic gym equipment as well. I'd add a good dumbbell set to your list unless you lumped those under "weights". A few different types of bars, a dip belt for adding weight to dips and pullups, and a low / mid / high cable set with various handles are also nice to have. Bonus points for a reverse hyper.
> No, this is not replaced by typing "python" (or "bc", or anything else, really) at your command prompt.
Why not? At least I can easily copy the results and the code to a document which avoids transcription errors. Or do you mean that there simply isn't a program that has the functions you use?
>> Incidentally, many young people (yes, I know how that sounds) do not know how useful a good engineering calculator can be and do not want to learn how to use one. They are missing out. Yes, there is a steep learning curve, but the rewards are significant if you do any amount of calculation in your hobby or work. No, this is not replaced by typing "python" (or "bc", or anything else, really) at your command prompt.
> Why not? At least I can easily copy the results and the code to a document which avoids transcription errors. Or do you mean that there simply isn't a program that has the functions you use?
My guess it's the ergonomics between a specialized tool and a non-specialized one. Technically, python may be able to replace "a good engineering calculator," but so can ASM. No one would even ask "Why non ASM?," because its ergonomics are near-universally understood to be so poor, but the same issues can apply to more popular tools like python, just less obviously.
I'm a calculator nut who has had many fancy TI (like the Voyage 200) and HP calculators (yes RPN) including the SwissMicro reproductions.
The ONLY benefit to these tools that I can surmise is basically that they are a physical device for scientists or others in the lab or field and not in front of a computer.
For any kind of data work I've seen, Excel, R, Python, Mathematica, or Matlab are all vastly superior. They allow faster entry, can show large amounts of data on screen, can allow for saving large amounts of data ...etc.
I don’t use the physical HP50G i have that often, but i love it emulated on the phone. It’s for semi complicated quick calculations where scientific calculator interface really shines compared to anything else available.
Some of us (mathematics side) still actually work on paper with calculators. Most of the job is thinking which tooling doesn’t necessarily improve.
> Most of the job is thinking which tooling doesn’t necessarily improve
yet you use paper and calculator.
That's like a carpenter saying it only took 10 seconds to make that cut while ignoring the 3 hours it took to create the jig so the cut would take 10 seconds.
You don't need the calculator to do the final sums until you've done all of the work gathering all of the data that needs to be calculated. It doesn't mean the calculator wasn't needed, just that it's only needed for one thing not every step along the way.
This wasn't the gotcha you think it was
near the end of the thinking yes.
yeah after a decade in my job, I have a ton of utility functions in python that I reach for when given a new request to think through something. I doubt a smaller screen where I have to type in stuff and then copy out results would make it any easier.
This thread is making my point for me rather well.
yes a lot of people love them, but nobody's actually coming up with anything I can't do in python...
You can do everything in Python. But perhaps it is not the best tool for every job.
This is similar to programming language discussions: any programming language can be discredited by saying "but I can do all that in assembly/C/whatever". Yes, you can, but perhaps there are better ways to do it.
usually with programming languages, we mention certain things - like how python is easier to read, it's almost like English. it comes with dozens of well designed built-in libraries to do a lot of useful things, and thousands of external libraries to do the rest - even gluing together c/Fortran code for the speedup. it's well supported on many platforms so you can design on one comfortable os environment and deploy in a scalable one.
for the engineering calculators, it seems the advantage is that some people learnt to use them in school and really love using them? that's great, I'm tempted to look into them myself, because it does sound cool to have a small device that does that sort of thing while I'm reading a book. but the truth is that for me, both at work and at home, my laptop is never more than 5 seconds away from showing me a repl, so maybe I'm not the target audience.
When all you have is a hammer arguments are so much fun
every now and again, I download the user manual for a graphing calculator and every time I've been underwhelmed by what they have to offer.
What impresses me in this discussion is how coy everybody has been about the actual benefits of these devices.
What impresses me is how you dismiss the usefulness to other people because you can't imagine it possibly being useful to someone because it's not useful to you
I declare thee argument winner! Well done chap!
I don't believe I've done that? I've said it doesn't appear that it would be useful to me - and I keep asking, probably for the 5th time now, in what way is it useful? The most cogent reply I've had so far is "0.85f’c". I don't know what that means. Please, could you explain? At this point I feel that even Apple fanboys put more effort in justifying their choices.
Do you like pen or pencil? Do you like college rule or wide rule paper? Do you like spiral or perf notebooks?
I don't need to justify my reasoning to you in a way that convinces you your way is wrong and mine is right. People like different things. I learned to use a scientific calculator as an extracurricular competition that allowed me to become very proficient at 10-key. Because of that, doing calculations on a computer goes against muscle memory. Laptops don't even have a 10-key. If I have a bunch of notes/papers with numbers that need to be added, I can pull out a calculator and just do the data entry and get a result. I don't have to go to my computer, or lug the laptop around in the shop. I just need numbers quickly crunched so I can then turn around and make a cut, drill a hole, or whatever. I don't need a large clunky compute device for that. Dropping a calculator on the shop floor is much less expensive than doing the same with a laptop. Lots of time, I just don't feel like needing to write a damn script just to get the tangent/cosine of a value to determine the lengths of the whatever.
Again, just because you have a hammer doesn't mean that you should use it drive that screw. Sometimes that tool that specifically made for purpose is better for the task at hand.
Now, pick any of the aforementioned options as to why I might prefer a calculator over a programming env just to crunch some numbers.
Thank you for explaining! So it's down to personal preference and invested training time, I wish you would just have said that to begin with. It's your hammer and you see everything as a nail. Got it.
hopefully you can now apply this in future endeavors of open mindedness that other people might do things differently than you do, and that's okay. even if you can possibly imagine why.
today's episode has been brought to you by the letter A for acceptance and the number 9
We need a concrete example.
0.85f’c
What does it mean?
You just write the stuff down or translate it to LaTeX.
Incidentally the 50G (and Prime) has a decent CAS built in which seems to get stuck less than some other commercial ones.
TBH TI-89 titanium is a better engineering calculator since the UI is way better. I have both a HP50G and a TI-89 titanium and I've done way more useful engineering work on the TI-89 titanium just because it's so much easier and accessible. Also of course, BASIC is a lot easier than reverse polish lisp for making some quick scripts.
Also I will add, there are known symbolic math issues on the HP50G due to the CAS system it uses. I will see if I can find a link.
For something that requires writing BASIC (or RPL for that matter), I think I'd rather use a programming language on a PC
However, keystroke programming a calculator, where you can still somewhat do simple loops with goto-like constructs when needed, strikes the right balance for the limited UI of a calculator
So something like the HP 15C is nice.
I've used both extensively. I disagree with this. I dislike the HP48 series but I dislike the TI89 more. It's probably because most people don't understand how to use the 50G properly. You really need to go through the HP training video ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTPruRVV-e8 ). Incidentally if you haven't watched that it's worth watching on its own - great production! In an engineering context, the 48-series was designed to produce small composable reusable programs and tools in the file tree which can be executed quickly.
Try a quick EE example for parallel resistor calculation that takes 2 and puts 1 value back on stack
<< 1/X SWAP 1/X + 1/X >>
Store that in RPAR in whatever directory you want or HOME. Then you whack in 2 resistors and hit the RPAR F-key. There is nothing faster or more efficient than that.
I still use a 15C all the time though. Even easier! 99% of what I do is on paper though and ends up getting chucked in the numeric solver.
Got both as well (TI-89v2 and hp50g).
TI-89 preferred by far. hp50g UX is bad, particularly the latency makes me sick.
What do you think distinguishes the HP-50 from the 48, 49? I had a 48 and 49.
There were form factor and interface changes, the 50 is an ARM running a simulator vs the original Saturn architecture, there's the SD card.
What are the key software changes?
Better CAS?
I admittedly don't use it in any great depth (I did in the past), but the iHP48 is a very nice HP-48 for iOS. And it solves my primary complaint with the originals, a backlight.
I loved my HP 48G when I was in school (even if it was much slower than the Ti 81 it replaced when it came to graphing). I regret throwing it away because of the nostalgia, but I don't feel a need for using it these days.
As such I am genuinely curious about what rewards you get from using an engineering calculator in your work. That's an honest question: I would really like to have an excuse to get my hands on a 48G again!
I broke the screen of my HP48GX when it fell in the crack of the passenger seat of my truck about 20 years ago and I am still pissed about it.
Try Droid48 on your phone. It works for me after I cracked a number key of my HP48GX.
Oh, I’ve tried using emulators, but without the actual physical keyboard it’s just not the same.
The HP 48GX got me through from high school college prep to EE/CS. I also happen to own an HP 48 overhead projector display and a thermal printer. Now, I just need an overhead projector to even use (the former). Sharing software was the killer app of the HP 48 G series, and the app that turned the serial IR port into a universal learning remote was a pranksters' dream because the IR LED was so overpowered.
Don’t mean to highjack but I was on the TI-89 camp, and I barely scratched the surface of its programming capabilities and memory. But it did help a lot with earthquake engineering and other mechanical dynamics courses in the university. Chugging a 6 kg laptop was impractical and this little TI was a beast!
EE*PRO to the rescue for me!
> but only after loading additional software
which additional software?
Also, these two statements:
> it takes forever to use them to calculate useful things, and graphing is much better done on a computer
> the rewards are significant if you do any amount of calculation in your hobby or work. No, this is not replaced by typing "python" (or "bc", or anything else, really) at your command prompt
seem like they're at odds. If a computer has a considerable processing speed advantage and better display plotting capabilities, what's the value prop of the HP/RPL environment over python/bc/anythingElseReally?
(I have a 48G, clearly I may not have gotten high enough on the learning curve, your answer could be relevant to my decision to keep it or send it on into the world)
If the source is GPL, why not release it?
> It's kind of like with gyms: what you get is what the market wants, and since the market doesn't know much, you get gyms full of useless exercise machines, because that's what people think a good gym should have.
I'm curious: what should a good gym have?
Squat rack, barbell+weights and bench as a minimum, bonus points for a pull-up bar and bars for triceps dips.
Most machines in gyms are either mostly useless, or actually detrimental to your health and fitness.
That works relatively well until you get injured, which, for people who train seriously, is almost inevitable. Then you have to train around said injury either temporarly or permantently and find great use for various machines.
Or you get to a high enough level (for you genetics), where targeting a specific area is more efficient with some kind of a machine.
Or you've been training for many years and are now getting older- lots of folks can't really bench after about 40, and same goes for the dips.
Doing compound lifts is a great way to build both strength and muscle mass, but it is a bit myopic to call machines useless. Nuance is important.
Must admit that I'm not a competitor in lifting, and it is only a secondary hobby, but 1.83x body weight bench isn't completely laughable either
Can't really disagree with that.
> The HP50g that came much later is better in every respect
Absolutely not. The big fail on everything after the 48SX was the keyboard.
I could sit in an exam and punch buttons without even looking at the calculator. I could feel the positive "click" from every single keypress, and I don't remember my 48SX ever dropping a keypress for any basic operation.
By contrast, the 49/50 series had mushy keyboards that bounced or failed to register presses. I still have 3 48SX calculators that I can use--I sold all my 49/50 series.
The excellent keyboard is bar none the big feature that I can't duplicate with any modern calculator.
I really wish some mechanical engineer would do a teardown on the old HP calulators and analyze why the keyboards were so damn good.
The 48GX you mean, but yes. The keyboard on the 48 series was chef's kiss. The keyboard on anything after that was complete dogshit.
If it weren't for the crap keyboard I would still be using HP calculators to this day. I blame Carly Fiorina, personally.
>Incidentally, many young people (yes, I know how that sounds) do not know how useful a good engineering calculator can be and do not want to learn how to use one. They are missing out. Yes, there is a steep learning curve, but the rewards are significant if you do any amount of calculation in your hobby or work. No, this is not replaced by typing "python" (or "bc", or anything else, really) at your command prompt.
I feel like this is highly role-dependent. I learned on an HP and I have my TI-89 from high school sitting on my desk, because I thought it might be useful. I never touch it. I never do math that's more difficult than arithmetic, and if I needed to do calculus or algebra for some reason I'd reach for Mathematica -- it's not like I remember calculus class anyway.
Hell I tried to help someone younger with algebra and forgot FOIL. I'm a successful distributed systems engineer. Why do I need an engineering calculator?
I never liked the 48 series or the 50G (I own both) that much. I can never remember how to use them half of the time. I always end up back with my 38 year old HP 15c. That has done me through separate engineering and mathematics degrees and about 30 years worth of jobs.
They just issued new ones as well! (HP 15CE)
// many young people (yes, I know how that sounds) do not know how useful a good engineering calculator //
It's ok, I sound like that too. The problem is that in order to be acceptable for school use, calculators have to be so lobotomized that they are useless for real engineering work. The keyboard cannot be qwerty, it has to have lockdown modes which shut off functionality, etc etc.
Frankly, as a math teacher, I'd be just as happy if my students could program their calculators to help them on assignments and tests.
// I wish there was a good HP50G emulator for iOS//
A calculator has to have buttons man :-)
The “no QWERTY rule” that standardized testing boards have is _absurd_. TI has a calculator with a dedicated alphabet keyboard cluster and a return key (the Nspire Touchpad)… except the keys have to be arranged in alphabetical order, because otherwise the College Board says no.
I am a fan of the HP Prime
https://hpcalcs.com/product/hp-prime-graphing-calculator/
But I use it in algebraic instead of RPN mode. I’ve got a 49g and a 50-something too.
People say it is pricey but I managed to get one discounted that was intended for the Latin American market. So is the thing that software is supposed to run on.
I have a Prime G2 and the RPN mode is just bad. It feels like it was an afterthought, and some things just don't seem to work properly in that mode.
My 48G+ is a much, much better RPN calculator.
The Prime G2 is also missing the equation library from the 48G+, which I found weird. Maybe they expect you to download what you need instead of using space in Flash for it.
That's my take on the RPN mode but I like the algebraic mode and agree the 48 series is way better for RPN.
(My favorite HP calc was the 28, which I bought when the 48 was available. I discovered soon afterwards that a powerful spring will eventually break the battery door and it seemed to be a problem that no engineering student managed to solve.)
I use my 32S (lives on my monitor pedestal next to my 8087 chip) weekly. When I was doing floating point/integer bit twiddling the 'base' key was my deeply appreciated friend. But that was 36 years ago. RPN (if trained into the brain) really is faster and I love how the register transfers work.
Nowadays when I'm not feeling especially tactile I tend to reach for the Free42 Android app, which lives in a stack with the 32S. If I ever get bored, I'm going to relearn how to program them both. Next time around on the wheel, likely, if I have hands.
I've replaced the battery on the 32S twice. Suck on that, modernity.
I'd recommend eBay, too, if you're within the continental US. This might be sacrilege, but after using a TI-89 I shifted to an TI Nspire CAS, since it has one of the highest-resolution screens in the market and still uses AAA batteries – I paid only $25 on eBay.
Those are pretty good.
I was thinking the other day about all the electromechanical devices such as Walkman cassette tapes and portable minidisc players that Sony got to work with just one AA battery as opposed to the usual two.
I have an HP Prime (and older ones such as the 48gx). I don't know why they remove the "undo" button from the Prime since it is necessary when perform mistakes.
I still have a HP48GX in perfect condition and love it. One of my first programs was to calculate how much „slower“ my time is running when I drive a car or fly in a plane compared to someone standing still on the sidewalk.
I still find it much more comfortable having a real calculator… call me old fashioned.
I love SwissMicros. I own a DM42 and DM15L. I strongly reccomend them for everyone young-to-old!
Buttons feel crisp and responsive, the postfix input is a dream I can't remember living without; it's also easy to disassemble too!
Seems like a really nice effort.
Nice they crammed it into the DM42 machines.
But for me, the learning curve is steeper than the utility. I have no real need for an actual calculator, I rely on my phone. On there I have iHP48, and I've already gone through much of that learning curve to make it useful (back in the day with an original one).
If you already have the DM42, I guess its a mostly compatible upgrade from that, to make stepping into it easier.
> Seems like a really nice effort.
Does it? Another powerful calculating engine trapped behind a skeuomorph interface?
Here[1] is a really nice effort that, sadly, hasn't been updated in 14 years and only runs on Windows. It's a wonderful 606kB math REPL that can probably do everything DB48X can do, except it foregoes all the 1970's portable calculator nonsense, making it about a thousand times more useful.
I have a nascent clone of this written in Rust using egui and rug, that is currently stalled because -- on bleeping Windows -- the former has problems with MinGW the latter has problems with MSVC... which makes me want to tear my hair out. I wait, patiently, for egui to get their MinGW ducks in a row because I have no hope that the GMP/MPFR/MPC stack is ever going to work on MSVC in my lifetime.
> Does it? Another powerful calculating engine trapped behind a skeuomorph interface?
Yes, it does. This is not a calculator app. It's calculator firmware that happens to also be runnable in an app.
They're trying to cram a HP48ish calculator into an HP42 clone calculator body, while retaining much of the UX of the calculator they're replacing.
The HP42 is the direct successor of the HP41 without the hardware interfaces and gizmos. Its essentially software compatible with the 41.
The HP48 (and -28) are completely different animals, from ground up hardware redesign to the notable RPL (Reverse Polish Lisp) foundations, and just in raw functionality as well. The 28/48 series had symbolic solvers and graphing (among a laundry list of other things), both novel at the time.
If you wanted an RPL based system in stand alone hardware with real buttons, you were stuck with legacy calculators. This fits in the modern DM42 system.
Calculator is for quick and dirty math in the field or in a lab, saving me from taking out the laptop from backpack or abandoning my optics alignment exercise and getting to the workstation on the other end of the table.
In other cases when I have convenient access to a computer, I'll use a proper math software like Matlab/Mathematica or whatever open source alternative. It's just a different use case.
Some newer terminal based implementation of something similar is Numbat [0], for example.
For a GUI calculator similar to seqmath, but cross platform, try speedcrunch [1].
[0]: https://numbat.dev/
Thanks this is a great recommendation - runs perfect in Wine. There definitely seems to be a habit with developers making calculators that still fall into a 70s form factor. This is a great departure.
I really do want to clone that thing, except cross platform, and enhanced with 64 bit native math. I want the same exact REPL calculator and function library running natively and starting instantly from a no-install binary on every platform I might ever touch.
Oh, and make it open source, so that people that know more than I about all things math can contribute. If you hadn't noticed, SpeQ Math is not open source.
Is there a significant difference between that package and SageMath / XCas / Octave and friends? While a bit arcane, I've always been a great fan of xcas
Yes. SpeQ math, is extremely small, starts instantly and stands alone with no complex runtime.
I feel the same way about not needing a physical calculator. I have an HP-48SX and an HP-15C Collector’s Edition. I enjoy these devices; they are high-quality and are exemplary products. However, as a professor I have regular access to my laptop, which can run circles around my handheld calculators. For quick calculations I open up the terminal and use the dc command, which is a command-line RPN calculator. For more involved computations, I have Python and Common Lisp REPLs, and I also sometimes use Microsoft Excel.
These days handheld calculators seem to be used the most in situations where people are restricted from using laptops and smartphones, such as during exams or in distraction-free settings. I think the reason Texas Instruments still has a viable calculator business is because TI markets heavily in the education market.
This is also an iphone app.
Same. Love calculators and used to flirt with the idea of buying an old HP graphing but the app scratches that itch. Once you learn RPN it just feels so natural.
https://hp15c.elf.org wraps https://hp15c.com/, calculators make lovely web apps on smart phones, collect them all!
That’s cool!
The Casio fx-9750GIII though very poorly named is a gem full of functionality from python, to spreadsheet and even a text editor and very low priced for what it does. If HP made a similar product with RPN it would be a game changer.
Spectacular project by one gentleman. Been using it for a while now on my Swissmicros.
I have it installed on my DM42. Its nice, but I dont like two things:
- Where's the apostrophe (equiv. to quote in lisp)? That should be an easily accessible key not buried in a menu.
- Why did he swap the log keys?
I also wish the HP48's steq interface to plot existed, but whatever.
The form factor of an HP48 or similar calculator is very attractive. Good tactile buttons in a format slightly laeger than a modern smartphone. I imagine it could work as a very good companion to a smartphone ifbit had modern comoute capacity and memory plus some modern I/O interfaces like USB or Bluetooth.
I think it should be a tribute to Claude-Nicolas Fiechter, Mika Heiskanen, and Bernard Parisse who came up with Erable. There is Giac/Xcas now that it is its spiritual successor.
I’ve got an HP50g that I love. I wish I could get my kids a SwissMicros calculator when they go to school but $300 is a little steep for a kid’s calculator.
(Heck, considering what TI charges for their crapulators, maybe it’s not such an outrageous price…)
Seems great. How does this compare to Free42? https://thomasokken.com/free42/
Free42 is more faithful to the original 42 than this is to the 48. Free42 also has an infinite stack hack which is a nice bridge to those accustomed to the RPL.
This is annoying to installe and not really completed (this is a much much larger endeavor than the 42). Its also very disorienting at first until you figure out the UC
That said, its good enough that I use it on my swisimicro rather than my 48s because the screen is much better
Well, it's based on the hp48 instead of the hp42, for one. Though that button layout is not that close to the 48, either.
It's not clear from that page nor the GitHub repo whether they are using decimal floating point underneath? It's one of the nicer things when using a calculator over something like Python.
As a DM42 owner who loves RPL, this is an exciting project.
Its annoying to instal, I eventually got it to work on my calculator (DM42) from the binaries.
The biggest thing is making sure all the firmware of the DM is upgraded
somehow doesn't work on my Ubuntu Firefox 131.0.3 but works on my Arch 132.0.
Same, shows JavaScript error:
"Uncaught ReferenceError: SharedArrayBuffer is not defined at db48x.js:615:40"
Both in Chrome and Firefox (both are up to date to versions way beyond where SharedArrayBuffer should have been introduced)
I think they should either use ArrayBuffer, or use https instead of http, apparently SharedArrayBuffer has security restrictions
It needs https.
Apparently, for security reasons, your server needs to add certain headers if you want to use SharedArrayBuffers.
https://hacks.mozilla.org/2020/07/safely-reviving-shared-mem...
This made me exactly the same amount as frustrated like the originals. So, good job I guess :D
If some sufficiently intense compute calculations were ran, will the display that shows the battery voltage drop?
Could this run on a TI or a NumWorks calculator?
RPN: Reverse Polish Notation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_Polish_notation
RPL: Reverse Polish LISP: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPL_(programming_language)
That is really weird.
IANAL, but the logo they're using looks infringingly similar to HP's.