Thank you. Amazing presenter - you've brightened my day. In a class of 30, only a few had calculators. My twin a boring commercial calc, and I had a sinclair cambridge built from a kit. I came up via the ranks of log tables and a slide rule. My next calc, the SR-56 which I used the programming to shave a few minutes off calculating graph points for one of my 'A' levels. Thanks HP! I used the SR-56 all the way through Imperial College and when I did my PhD afterwards. Texas sent me an old calc to salvage the power unit to repair my SR-56 a few years later. The design is beautiful, it was powerful in its day, has a retro display, and it's amazing how good that shot of nostalgia now feels. Life was simpler back then - if only we could take the good bits and merge with modern tech and the internet. Out of interest I coverted the HP25 and its design, but the reverse polish seemed a bit of a learning curve. Used FORTH at Philips Medical in the 80s which is also RP and realised it's not that difficult.
The HP-25... the calculator that induced me to switch my major from Engineering to Comp-Sci. I spent endless hours programming that little guy. It was my pride and joy back when I was 19. My only regret was that the continuous memory version came out about 6 months after I bought it.
The SR-56 was my calculator as a freshman at Ga. Tech (Physics). It was very reliable and had relatively good battery life in the NiCd pack - no expendable option. The programming I found very easy and it was an enormous lifesaver when doing repetitive calculations such as converting astronomical coordinates for precession, days between dates etc. The lack of continuous memory was the main shortcoming. Once I had the HP-41C the SR-56 was just loaded up and left on all the time. The 56 was in fact more accurate than the HP-25 and it wasn't even close. I regarded the 25C's programming capability as barely above novelty/toy level usefulness. The pause feature was very good for doing series approximations by setting up an infinite loop and checking the convergence periodically. In short, the SR-56 was extremely useful and very robust and I certainly got more than my money's worth. I didn't own another TI until 2001 when I picked up a TI-92+. The 58 and 59 were in every way inferior to the HP-41C and not nearly as competitive as the SR-56 despite their greater sophistication.
Great session Gene! I owned a 57 in 1980 and had no idea the SR-56 had preceded it - apart from a little mention in the TI-57 manual. But I also had no idea of how diminished the 57 was compared to the 56 : no printer, and only 50 merged steps, which is not as powerful as 100 unmerged steps, and only 8 registers including t instead of 10 registers plus t on the 56. What a waste (but I still love my old 57, of course, you always love your first don't you?) About the Pause key while running, it works on my 58C too, although the pause is much shorter than on 58/59. And I totally agree about the 58C value as a major programmable calculator of this era that a collector should own. And its price even today is unbeatable. And what a look, with this classy black/gold/yellow colours.... Only the HP-34C beats it on the aesthetic score.
How to recognize a true nerd - calculating the average of the random number generator of a programmable calculator by pressing the random function 10000 times. My hats off to you Sir of Sirs.
It's a programmable calculator, just write a loop! One of my first programs was a loop to add the integers 1 through n. I didn't hear about young Carl Gauss until many years later.
No love for the affordable TI's from that guy.. They sold well in Europe TI had a plant that made them here in Italy, along other TI products. HP are more refined but for the price TI was good value and lasted well (battery leakage aside).
![NISAMANEE - TADA (ท้าดา) [ OFFICIAL MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hcQHEPMmJpU/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you. Amazing presenter - you've brightened my day. In a class of 30, only a few had calculators. My twin a boring commercial calc, and I had a sinclair cambridge built from a kit. I came up via the ranks of log tables and a slide rule. My next calc, the SR-56 which I used the programming to shave a few minutes off calculating graph points for one of my 'A' levels. Thanks HP! I used the SR-56 all the way through Imperial College and when I did my PhD afterwards. Texas sent me an old calc to salvage the power unit to repair my SR-56 a few years later. The design is beautiful, it was powerful in its day, has a retro display, and it's amazing how good that shot of nostalgia now feels. Life was simpler back then - if only we could take the good bits and merge with modern tech and the internet. Out of interest I coverted the HP25 and its design, but the reverse polish seemed a bit of a learning curve. Used FORTH at Philips Medical in the 80s which is also RP and realised it's not that difficult.
The HP-25... the calculator that induced me to switch my major from Engineering to Comp-Sci. I spent endless hours programming that little guy. It was my pride and joy back when I was 19. My only regret was that the continuous memory version came out about 6 months after I bought it.
Thanks for this. Out brilliant math teacher Ole Rindung, Denmark, brought it into his lessons. It shaped my life.
The SR-56 was my calculator as a freshman at Ga. Tech (Physics). It was very reliable and had relatively good battery life in the NiCd pack - no expendable option. The programming I found very easy and it was an enormous lifesaver when doing repetitive calculations such as converting astronomical coordinates for precession, days between dates etc. The lack of continuous memory was the main shortcoming. Once I had the HP-41C the SR-56 was just loaded up and left on all the time. The 56 was in fact more accurate than the HP-25 and it wasn't even close. I regarded the 25C's programming capability as barely above novelty/toy level usefulness. The pause feature was very good for doing series approximations by setting up an infinite loop and checking the convergence periodically. In short, the SR-56 was extremely useful and very robust and I certainly got more than my money's worth. I didn't own another TI until 2001 when I picked up a TI-92+. The 58 and 59 were in every way inferior to the HP-41C and not nearly as competitive as the SR-56 despite their greater sophistication.
Beautiful presentation, very interesting and lively. I really enjoyed it, even if I have an SR-52 😀
Great session Gene! I owned a 57 in 1980 and had no idea the SR-56 had preceded it - apart from a little mention in the TI-57 manual. But I also had no idea of how diminished the 57 was compared to the 56 : no printer, and only 50 merged steps, which is not as powerful as 100 unmerged steps, and only 8 registers including t instead of 10 registers plus t on the 56. What a waste (but I still love my old 57, of course, you always love your first don't you?)
About the Pause key while running, it works on my 58C too, although the pause is much shorter than on 58/59. And I totally agree about the 58C value as a major programmable calculator of this era that a collector should own. And its price even today is unbeatable. And what a look, with this classy black/gold/yellow colours.... Only the HP-34C beats it on the aesthetic score.
The TI-57 was a lower end alternative. The successor of the SR-56 was the TI-58 - clearly an upgrade in capacity.
How to recognize a true nerd - calculating the average of the random number generator of a programmable calculator by pressing the random function 10000 times. My hats off to you Sir of Sirs.
It's a programmable calculator, just write a loop! One of my first programs was a loop to add the integers 1 through n. I didn't hear about young Carl Gauss until many years later.
One rule for good presentations: Never pass things around the listeners while you are talking.
My TI-58C [2nd] [Pause] key works while program is running ;-)
How mate is price the calculator S56 Scintific calculator? Thank you.
No love for the affordable TI's from that guy.. They sold well in Europe TI had a plant that made them here in Italy, along other TI products. HP are more refined but for the price TI was good value and lasted well (battery leakage aside).
Gutsy!
Touting a TI calculator at an hp calculator convention is a lot like praising Windows at a Mac convention.