dude 1st comment! (just testing poster anarchy whatchamacallit, i've been meaning to). I hope it is in fact the first comment!

Hmmm, I like TI, HP stinks! GO TI!!
(i almost had 1st comment!)

wow, the comparisons are great but doesn't the time taken to solve certain problems depends on how much free RAM you have?

In my opinion, there is no comparison. TI calculators have too many advantages outside of the calcs themselves i.e. VTI. I don't think a kickbutt emulator like VTI exists for any of the HP calcs. Correct me if I'm wrong.

HP distributes an emulator for free. They had a contest or something earlier this fall that allowed you to download the emulator. The only problem was the high resolution of the HP49G skin where you had to have like 1600x1200 resolution in order to see the whole thing. I had the resolution, but did others?

~ferich

About that emulator, IT SUCKS!!! VTI runs perfectly at 640X480, I run at 800X600. and the HP emulator was crap!

I know of four Windows emulators for HP graphic calculators: Emu48, Emu49, Emu38, and YorkeM (and there are two versions of YorkeM).

The standalone YorkeM that HP gives away is very buggy. The version of YorkeM that HP gives away with the SDK is okay, but not great.

Emu48, Emu49, and Emu38 are all based on the same code. The latest version of Emu48, 1.14, does an excellent job of emulating both the 48 and the 49. Unfortunately, Emu48 doesn't support grayscale like YorkeM does.

You can also get x48, an emulator for the Macintosh and Linux/Unix.

This is the first calc 'benchmark' I've seen. It reafirms what we already knew- the Ti is quicker in symbolic math, while the HP is great as a pure number cruncher-, but it is interesting to see how much faster the Ti's CAS is. I'd like to see a 'benchmark' featuring large integer and floating-point calculations. My guess, the HP would win, but not by as much of a margin.

lots of pictures missing :P

btw, off topic:
what does it mean when the flash rom can be rewritten 1000 times (read that on the "destroy your 89" page)?

If you consistently toggle a bit between 0 and 1 in the Flash ROM enough, it will fry that bit. On the 83+, it would take about 7 years if you wrote to it and garbage collected 5x/day. It should be a similar amount of time on the 89.

That's the exact same estimate that came up on the A89 list -- but it's assuming that EVERY SINGLE BIT is written to during a garbage collection. It's extermely rare that a even 90% of the _bytes_ are toggled during garbage collection (every time a byte is changed it counts as a 'write' for every bit it contains, I believe). People are paranoid -- just forget about that "I can destroy my archive" rumor

By the time you destroy a calculator with all of those read-writes, it will be time to buy a new model calc anyway.

The TI-89 flash ROM is guaranteed to 100,000 cycles. The HP49G flash ROM is guaranteed to 1,000,000 cycles. Either way that is a very long time.

I think it's a tad biased.

Have any of you guys been to hpcalc.org?

That place is completely confusing. I'm glad we have a place as organized as this to find what we need on our line of calcs. They need more direction and something...anyway...LONG LIVE TI!!!

jake

TI needs some competition, or they get crappy, like microsoft.
Ti is not as good as you think, TI released the functional equivelant of the TI-89+, but buried that label, advertising that there would be no reason at all to buy a new calc, due to flash rom. but they release more calcs than flash rom updates for the 89 and 89+.

Yeah, in Olivier Miclo's page, he said something about a comparison between the HP 49G and the TI-89 on hpcalc.org, and I looked for it, **even searched for "TI-89" and "comparison"** and found nary a document. Maybe it's Miclo, maybe it's hpcalc.org. Either way, that site is confusing as hell.

~ferich

The search thingy can't find numbers. Why? Who knows. Perhaps the search engine is run by a 4mhz Saturn processor. But wait, wouldn't that mean it could ONLY find numbers? Ah, well, forget it...

-Zero
President of Mogsoft, Inc.

It's because the Perl search script I use doesn't work with numbers. I want to use a different script, but remember that hpcalc.org is a one-man operation (whereas ticalc.org has about a dozen people on staff) and I don't have the time to look for and set up a new search script. Maybe someday...

The page says something about hpcalc.COM, not .ORG!

Also, it says (near the top) that it tries not to make the 89 look better than the 49, because other pages seem to give an advantage to the 49. But he really makes the 89 look better, on purpose.

Several times, he notices that the 89 has external programs that do 'more' or 'better' than the 49 with its built-in programs. You know what: the 49 also has external programs! This kind of comparison (my external vs your built-in) isn't fair.

Also, the author uses TI-89 version 2.00, which does not exist (do you have v2.00? No, you don't!), and a real HP49 (there have already been several ROM updates from HP).

He notices, too, that the 49 doesn't autosimplify expressions. We knew that already. That's a good thing IMHO, because if you want to simplify an expression, you can (expand function etc...), but on the 89 it's impossible to know, inside a program, what the original expression was. It can be annoying in some cases.

I must agree, however, that displaying '^' under its 'exp...ln' form might be considered a bad idea.

I think this a good comparaison!It's a god idea to take the time for the operations!http://www.jibsoft.fr.fm/
allez voir aussi mon comparatif ti89/casio graph100