I do like how well the HP calc OS was written. The Saturn chip that it uses is also interesting. I believe it's also 16-bit, but running only at 4Mhz, which is kind of impressive. I'm not sure if the Saturn chips have any special features over the M68K chips. I read somewhere that the HP 49 does 100!*100! in 1.5 seconds in exact mode, whereas the TI89 does the same operation in 4 seconds in exact mode. They're both very cool calculators in my opinion. Too bad they had to take out the infrared ports that the 48G/+/X series had (cheating concerns in other countries). I do have to say upon experience that the HP Calc OS has a better OS, but it has a harder to figure out interface.

I forgot to add that the HP49 has REAL TIME 3D graphing, unlike the 89 which calculates, generates wireframe, then displays.

Just a little addition to my t00 z3|\|z3

Ugh...and finally, the HP real time graphing is faster than the TI-89 non-real time graphing.

ACtually, I'm pretty certain that the Saturn is a 4-bit chip. That may sound weird, but 4-bit chips can do math operations insanely fast. As far as the OS, the HP OS may be *written* better, but for many people the TI OS is much more user friendly.

It's really rather simple...the Saturn is, more or less, a RISC chip--certainly when compared to the massive instruction set and addressing modes of the M68K series. The 68000s are incredibly powerful general-purpose microprocessors, but the Saturn was designed specifically for calculators and has been refined through several generations. It has hardware BCD support (for blazingly fast decimal arithmetic) and what looks like a pipelined ALU (wherein you can perform multiple minor arithmetic operations in one instruction cycle). Furthermore, because of the generations of revision, the HP OS is probably a lot better suited for the micro.

And as for this whole "We don't have a log key" issue, if you're out of high school, buy yourself a 92+ instead of an 89. Then you type "log(" and you're done. (The primary reason one would desire an 89 over a 92+, unless you're hoping to pocket the thing, is that the 92+ is not allowed on the SAT.)

You're correct. 4-bit chip.

I've never tried exact mode before, as I don't have anything above a TI-86. However, my TI-86 will do 100!^6 in less than half a second in Normal mode. How does that compare?

It doesn't mean anything. "Exact" calculations are generally MUCH slower than "Normal". that's because when in Normal mode, the calculator can "forget" the less-significative numbers to speed up calculation. In exact mode, it is forbidden to do that. As a result, computing such "complicated" numbers is a heavy, difficult task.
But you're right when you say TI is fast in Normal mode, because in general, this mode is sufficient. And for those Normal modes, HP and TI are equally fast.

In reply to most of the previous comments...

Yes, the HP-48/49 has the largest library of games available, as far as I can tell. One look at www.hpcalc.org will tell you that. In addition they have spreadsheets, databases, word processors, etc. It's pretty clear that their user base is mostly professionals, whereas ours is primarily high school students. *grin*

Another advantage of the HPs that they failed to consider is support. HPs support much more advanced programming right there on the calculator, and apparently have better shell interfacing and exception handling than TI-OS (though I'll wait for 2.00). In addition, the architecture is painstakingly documented.

I'd actually like to add to this professional vs. educational blurb. In countries such as Australia, some European countries, and South Africa, I've read that HP calculators are more popular among students. They were so popular, in fact that many teachers in those countries had to ban the HP calcs with the IR ports, because they feared it would be used for cheating. That's why the 49 does not have IR ports, they're marketing to students in other countries, and trying to enter the eduacational market in the US moreso.

Cheating isn't the only reason that HP purged the IR port from the 49G. It's also a limitation of the NEC Saturn processor. It only has one high-power output pin, which was traditionally reserved for the IR port on the 48 series. The 49G is the first HP calculator ever to use a flash ROM. Flash memory requires an incredible amount of attention from the CPU to be written to. That high-power output pin is now used by the Flash ROM. I'm not a very big deal anyway....it's just as simple to plug in the link cable. The thing that disturbed me however is that the 49G uses a 10-pin serial connector instead of the 4-pin one that the 48 series used. Why???? Because of this, a lot of HP 49G users (including myself) are waiting on HP to release the new PC kit for it!

I think TI89 has a great advantage over hp49:
Screen!
Yeah, screen is very large on a 89 whereas it is small on a HP49
Morevover who cares if his calc does 100!*100! in 1,5 s or in 4 s
This is stupid!
For any question of derivating or intergrating step by step progs exists for 89!
TI os is so easy to understand, 89 is really the user friendly calc!
For programmation it is real that 89 is not the best , but lets wait for SDK; it will change the rulez!
And ASM M68k is a very good prog language to learn!It may be difficult but then it is very clear!
So, i believe that 89 is better than HP49!
TI has made a very efficient calc with a processor who wasnt designed for!

You should get an HP Calculator before you go on this small rant. You are talking like the HP calculators are just sluggish pieces of crap. They're very high powered calculators, and shouldn't be urged as useless. Both calculators have advantages, but DeathWolf has probably never touched an HP calc.

You are wrong!
I got with HP48 AND HP49
I tried and compared
But 89 is definatly the best

zeromegax, if u have an ICQ# we can talk!

> For any question of derivating or intergrating step
> by step progs exists for 89!

Where is this step-by-step integration program? I only know of the step-by-step derivation one.

> Yeah, screen is very large on a 89 whereas it is
> small on a HP49

The effective history screen on the TI-89 is only 160x64, not much better than the HP 49G. The total screen is 160x100 compared with 131x64. There is not a phenominal difference here.

> For programmation it is real that 89 is not the
> best , but lets wait for SDK; it will change the
> rulez

People tell me that once you learn User(Sys)RPL, it becomes MUCH simpler to make good programs using the CAS, but I don't know. We shall see.

<<For any question of derivating or intergrating step by step progs exists for 89!


I would like to know where is the derivating or intergrating step by step progs for 89?
because I want the progs

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/ti92-ti89.miclo/

One of two things is happening
1) I am too blind to see the step-by-step integration program on O.Miclo's site even though I find the step-by-step derivation program just fine as well as all other calc programs. OR

2) there is NO step-by-step integration program.

Which of these is true?

If you find a step-by-step integration program, please print the EXACT URL to download the file. i.e. if I wanted to download DoorsOS, I would go to
http://www.ticalc.org/pub/89/ asm/shells/doorsos.zip
without the space between the / and asm (ticalc board limitations -- oh well, it's better than the old 15 character limit)

I've used to use TI calcs, and then switched. When
I get the cash, I will definatly get an HP-49 unless
somebody comes out with a program to simulate RPN for
the 89. If anybody does/has come out with something
like that, I would probably buy a 89 for the lower
price and larger support base. Literally, there are
only 2 HP users in the whole school, but it's all worth
it for RPN.

I have updated the comparison to remove some (hopefully all) of the bias towards the TI-89 and correct some oversights. Thanks for everyone's suggestions and to ticalc for posting this article.

personally, i HAVE tried both of these calcs and the HP-49 is acctually pretty good. i own an 89 but my teach. uses a HP. if i bought another calc it would porbably be an HP-49