Supercalculators

I'm thinking about getting a new calculator.  I've had a TI92 for ages and ages, and I'd like to get something that's like that, but more powerful and faster.  From what I read on Amazon, the TI Voyage 200 is the best thing TI sells, but it doesn't seem like it's such a big step up from the TI92 to be worth $200.

Basically, I want Maple but on something handheld.  Is there anything else out there?  I guess I could just buy a netbook and run Maple on that.  That'd only be like $50 more. :/

Yeah, the calculator companies kind of topped out the product 10 years ago.  The latest batch are just faster and have more memory, and are ugly parodies of cell phones with fucked up button shapes.  Try a lateral move for something different, such as HP 50G which is the current version of a series that people pay lots on ebay for the ealier HP 48G series (GX for expandable) but the development team folded after that, then HP came out with a version with buttons that people said were too fragile, but is supposed to be better now with 50G.

Unless they go really different with a larger screen, touchscreen, something more like a Nintendo DS or iPhone in quality but with a much larger screen, it may be you'd run calculator software of some sort on such a device in the future instead of an actual dedicated calculator.

I'm strictly a TI-89 guy myself. I know the 92 has the keyboard, and maybe you're used to that, but for my money the TI-89 Titanium, running 4MHz faster than the Voyager and selling for 30-40 USD less than the Voyager is a better option. Consider too that the TI-89 has a mini-USB port, making you a little less reliant on TI's proprietary cables.

That all said, I want an HP-50g like mad. I've known a few calc nerds who are crazy about the RPN entry system. It's a learning curve at first, but can apparently be lightning fast. And the 50g now sports and SD card slot for more memory ( and presumably swappable storage of notes and other docs.) Same price as the TI-89 Titanium: about 150 USD on the street.

Of course, you could always grab a little netbook for about twice that price and run Maple to your heart's content.

OP here.  If anyone's interested, I did end up buying a netbook.  I bought this one http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=9251445&type=product&id=1218068507849 for $270 with tax at best buy, which was the absolutely cheapest, smallest, bottom-of-the-barrel one I could find.  The battery life is awful (3 hours if I'm lucky), the keyboard is too small to type normally, and by normal computer/laptop standards, it's performance is awful.  But it's good enough to run Maple, Mathematica, and Sage simultaneously with no problems.  The only hitch was that the processor they used is old, and Sage  wouldn't run on it unless I rebuilt it from source. It wasn't hard, but it took around 8-10 hours to run.

In the end, other than the thing with Sage the only negatives are the battery life and the size.  It's a lot smaller than a laptop, but it's still significantly bigger than a TI92.  It's pushing the boundaries of "handheld", but it's alright.

(I also love that I got a recovery CD for a computer with no CD drive.)

>>3
>4MHz faster

Holy shit, we've travelled back in time to the 90's when processor speed was measured in MHz!

>>4
>>5

Both related, but yeah, I was surprised when I went back to school a couple years ago and got into researching graphing calcs at (a) the low proc speed on high end models when there are so many awesome modern chips available and (b) the lack of really quality graphing calc software for standard PCs.

We've got to be on the edge, right, of someone dropping an atom processor into a handheld dedicated to calculation. A Sage handheld, maybe, running under a wee linux environment? A few ports for taking in data, too, make it really nice. I'd probably drop $300 on that as quick as on a netbook if it were a reliable device, and if the battery time was respectable. (~6-8 hours, cradle rechargeable.)

>>2
Nintendo DS or iPhone in quality but with a much larger screen, it may be you'd run calculator software of some sort on such a device in the future instead of an actual dedicated calculator.

I was thinking about this but if the teachers in my mathematics department are any indicator math majors are too robotic to use anything cool or colorful or ergonomically designed.
They enjoy everything broken down fully into little block text and dots on a small dark screen too much.

>>7
Nah, it's just that noone's made anything yet that's more powerful than a HP 50 but just as convenient to use.  You can't carry a netbook around with you very conveniently, and anything smaller doesn't presently have the power to run any decent math software.

>>6

It would be easy to make something like that, I'm sure, but I just don't think the market for $300 calculators that are illegal as hell on the SAT or exams is out there.  Plus, once you get that high price-wise, you might as well just go a little further and buy a laptoop/netbook. 

Soon enough, a Pocket PC-type thing will come out that's powerful enough to run proper Windows programs, and at that point the only thing keeping the calculator makers alive will be the fact that it's illegal on the SAT's.

Another thing, to make something with the power of Mathematica, say, you'll need to a proper software package, which isn't so easy to write.  You could just license Mathematica and adapt their software to a new platform, but that could probably jack up the price of it $50 right there.

Texas Instruments really seems to have a monopoly on the higher end calculator field! Why hasn't any company come out with a calculator half as cheap with just the same amount of features! The hardware surely doesn't cost that much to manufacture! The software also isn't that complex! Seems a little strange to MILKRIBS4k!

>>8
Yeah, the testing thing is a factor to those of us still in school, but honestly, here in the US, University courses are getting more and more likely to cut you out of graphing calculators entirely. After a two year love-affair with my TI-89, I'm finding myself using a Casio 115ES because it's the most sophisticated thing allowed for university level Physics and Chemistry. No calculator at all for Calc II.

Sensible, since you can pack a world of notes in the best graphing calcs.

Still surprises me, though, that there's not something out there more advanced than the TI-89 / HP-50g. I know there's a market for it with working engineers.

>>9
Is this where I'm supposed to call you an anus?

>>10
>Casio 115ES

Damn, a $20 calculator with an equation solver and calculus functions?  I might have to upgrade from my TI-34 for my non-graphing calculator needs.  (And it's even on sale for .1% off on Amazon!)

OTOH, there's just something in my brain I can't shut off that equates "Casio" with "Cheap piece of shit".

Some trivia for you:  Casio came out with the first graphing calculator in 1985.  They had nice design then, with a metal face plate.

>>9
I agree with the anus.

>>9
>>14
Because there will be no market for calculators in 5 years.

Ti-Nspire

/thread

>>12
Seems a lot better than my TI36, 66% of the cost, and still solar powered.

>>16
You need to pay $10 more for the CAS version :(

>>16

/threadblock

The Nspire is a massive, massive disappointment. It's like the 89 Titamium's savant half-brother. No Flash programs, no assembly programs, no 3D surface graphing (natively, anyway. Apparently there are 3rd party apps.)

The Nspire CAS is something I haven't looked into, though. Admittedly my first impression of the Nspire was based on the model as it was at launch, and there's an OS upgrade out now.

>>18
>Apparently there are 3rd party apps.

OMFG I remember downloading a program to do 3D graphing on a TI86.  It took fucking AGES lmao.  Of course, it was written in Basic and not assembly.

>>16

Looks shittier than a TI89, and not much cheaper.  DO NOT WANT

After years with a TI92, I don't think I could ever use a graphing calculator without a QWERTY anyway.  Plus, the programming capability's very limited, apparently, and *that* is an absolute dealbreaker in my book.  Without being able to program, any calculator you buy is going to be limited to doing it's basic, built in functions.  One of the biggest reasons I wanted to get something better in the first place was that the programs I wanted to run on my TI92 took forever on its tiny processor.

HP's latest calc looks pretty sweet.
I have the voyager 200 myself and it is nice, but not worth the upgrade from the ti-92.
The main thing I really don't like is that I have to used haxed 64 bit drivers to get it to connect to my pc, and have not found an easy way to put pics/notes on it.

>>20
>The main thing I really don't like is that I have to used haxed 64 bit drivers to get it to connect to my pc, and have not found an easy way to put pics/notes on it.

I'm surprised, considering the Voyager's relationship to te 89. The TI-89 Titanium is good there, though TI's software is craptastic.

How does the HP fare for connectivity and holding docs? I'm guessing the SD card makes things a snap on the 50g.