Uranus Solar Calc. module - pic.

[retroleds]

Alas, another dead one. Owner says it was eating batteries,,,but oddly stuck it in a thin cardboard box wrapped in a sheet of paper. DOA, same after waaaay too much time spent. Anyway, the module for those curious.


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[J Thomas]

[retroleds]

No, I meant the entire watch was wrapped in paper. Just a crap way to ship a rare watch. This one didn't have Ni-Cads in it(two battery ports), nor does it have the charging dimples on each side - I have only seen those on the non-solar calcs. The solar calc. is set up so much different than the regular calc., I'll try to get to photographing a non-solar calc for comparision(I have one here). I recently won a batch of Uranus watches that had the batteries left in them....got a few workers out of the deal. Funny thing is, the solar cells are all different sizes, shapes and construction. I think they were all "factory", but the solar cell was just an afterthought. Essentially there are two contacts on the front side of module where you can tape into the power for the circuit. So the solar cell just does a minimal amount of assistance, no real "power". Very different than say a Synchronar or an Alfatronic, which have solar panels 6-8 times as big as these.

[rewolf]

...I think they were all "factory", but the solar cell was just an afterthought...

Could be true - maybe just added for marketing reasons.

Reminds me of a recently purchased Chinese copy of a Casio fx-3600Pv solar calculator - very well made, and even much faster and more precise than the original - only that it uses a 3V lithium cell for "backup" (original: 1.5V alkaline) and the 4 amorphous solar cells never deliver more than 1.6V (like in the original). That is, the calculator does not work without the battery; in fact it never draws ANY current out of the solar cells, not even in strongest sunlight. The cells are connected to the circuit, but without any effect...

[joeywaycool]

On the discussion of scientific calculators, I would think some company (asian or otherwise) one should consider re-making some of the RPN calculators made by HP. A fortune could be made with a decent copy of a HP 32SII.

HP discontinued all of their RPN calcs in the late 90's I believe. Big mistake in my opinoin. as there are many people out there like me who can no longer use other types.

[rewolf]

On the discussion of scientific calculators, I would think some company (asian or otherwise) one should consider re-making some of the RPN calculators made by HP. A fortune could be made with a decent copy of a HP 32SII.

HP discontinued all of their RPN calcs in the late 90's I believe. Big mistake in my opinoin. as there are many people out there like me who can no longer use other types.

I bet that not even 1% of potential users would prefer RPN - maybe just too small a market.

HP still makes and sells RPN calculators. I have an HP-35S - a beautiful and powerful machine, but IMHO a nightmare to operate. RPN is not the problem, I got used to it quickly, but it's the keyboard layout - it shares this problem with the powerful Texas Instruments TI-68.
All I need are the usual scientific functions, sometimes bin/hex/dec, maybe a few linear program steps - that is, my TI SR-56 serves me well, and sometimes the Casio fx-6500G or fx-992s for hex. For anything beyond this I use the computer as I'm sitting in front of it anyway.
Honestly: which engineer or technician today needs a graphic or programmable pocket calculator? Solving equations or working with matrices on a 2-line 16-digit display and 4- or 6-fold function keys and limited (or no) editing capabilities? Maybe for the "fun" of it, but never at work where time is money.
All those graphic calculators are only used at school (what for, btw), and as soon as people have passed their exams they sell these expensive toys on ebay (the standard text is: like new, only used a few times, only used for one exam, only used for 3 months, etc.). Nobody uses complex calculators seriously.

[joeywaycool]

It is true that demand must have been not enough to keep HP's interest in the calculator product line, but the percentage of RPN users has got to be greater than 1% as you suggest.

[joeywaycool]

Oh, and I took a look at the 35S per your comment. Looks pretty nice.

With the death of my 32SII a couple years ago, I resorted to purchase the 33S (only option at the time), and thought it was a piece of shite...

[rewolf]

... but the percentage of RPN users has got to be greater than 1% as you suggest.

Agreed - among engineers aged 35+

[joeywaycool]

Bingo! (You must have been reading my profile )

[rewolf]

Bingo! (You must have been reading my profile )

No no, that would have been cheating
Quick survey at work: 10 Engineers (electronics, software) - 2 of them use RPN calculators (HP 28C, HP 11C), the rest Casio (me sometimes TI).