Talk:HP 49/50 series

I would like to redact apart the HP49G Plus calc article because I have plenty of information about this calc... even more... I have this calculator. May I create an apart page without considering it vandalism? Please. Thank you. --juan andrés 04:34, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Need to restore photo

The use of a marketing photo of the calculator was, and would again, clearly fair use. Would a kind logged-in user kindly re-upload it? -128.61.83.190 (talk) 10:08, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Trouble

Sorry. But I'm having trouble to make a link to a new page. could you help me, please? Thank you.--juan andrés 04:42, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

HP-50 USB port uses XModem and Kermit?! It should be RS-232 port, I guess. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.18.15.18 (talk • contribs) 17:14, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

50G!

Why put up a model that has not been released yet? WIKI is not supposed to be a rumor-mill. Get it off of here until it is official. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 208.164.50.154 (talk • contribs) 18:28, 6 July 2006 (UTC) ---

Why does it have to be "officially released" before details can be published on Wiki? It's a fact that the item exists and that the photo and details are accurate. IMHO the Wiki yardstick should be "Is it the truth", not "can the public buy one". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 222.154.235.62 (talk • contribs) 22:28, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, our yardstick (an important part of it, anyways) is "Verifiability, not truth". The section on the hp50g could certainly benefit from citing the source(s) for the provided information. In the meantime, {{future product}} should provide some warning about the speculative nature of the content. — Jeff | (talk) | 05:23, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I thought that the {{future product}} was the best solution, although I'm not sure how it can always be "reconciled" with "Verifiability, not truth". One would hope that the best kinds of entries are both verifiable AND the truth.

Well the 50G is now officially available per Hp's website and newsgroups with many users of the 50G. Someone care to update this? -Jtolman 15:47, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

50G Official Release (& General Tidy Up)

We've had debates in the past about this aspect of the 50G. I'd like to suggest that now that HP have decided to put it on their Brazil web site that we consider it "officially released by HP". Additionally, I've just put a couple of hours into cleaning up the article - attempting to make it more concise and efficient (eg cutting out the fat) - just like a good program eh? :) I think it's still a bit loose in places - perhaps those with a better grasp of the English language might like to continue what I've started. T h e M a v e r i c k 11:48, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Photo Request

Now that the HP 50g has been out for a while, is there any possibility that someone who owns one would take a photo of it? There are photos for the other models but not the 50g; it would really help the page if one was put there. (When you're scanning down the page looking for the 50g, you tend to look for a photo since it's there and acts as a sort of header to all the other models' articles.) I'd put one up, but I don't own one (yet). --Kadin2048 03:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

No dash in HP calculator model numbers in recent history

HP did away with the dash in calculator model numbers some years back. The correct designations are "HP 49G", "HP 49G+", "HP 50G", etc. The last calculators in this family to have a dash were the "HP-48S" and "HP-48SX". The G and GX dropped the dash. --Brouhaha 19:37, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree, but there is still a dash in the page title. Has this been changed and reverted, or never changed? If never changed, why not change the title and redirect from the old? Pyrilium (talk) 02:26, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Future HP 49g+ Firmware

I've removed the sentences "It is unclear whether HP will release any further ROM upgrades for the HP 49G+. However, the HP 50G ROM upgrade can be installed on the HP 49G+ (but not on the HP 49G)." because it's not a case of "the HP 50g ROM working on the 49g+" - it's a ROM designed for both calcs (it detects and displays the correct hardware platform).

T h e M a v e r i c k 13:39, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

HPGCC description

The article does not make it at all clear that HPGCC is a cross compiler and does not run on the calculator itself. Does anybody have any suggestions for rewording the appropriate sections? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.227.107.50 (talk) 23:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC).

Added a note at the end of paragraph 1 that HP-GCC is formally a cross-compiler. Pyrilium (talk) 02:36, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

It should be noted that GCC on other platforms is licenced under the GPL as well, so unless some clause was changed the mention of "contrary" should be removed. 69.115.52.75 (talk) 04:17, 8 June 2008 (UTC) Restructured that part, assuming that it was correct in having the HPGCC GPL Extentions require GPL licenceing by all complied code. 69.115.52.75 (talk) 04:24, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

NO TI CALCS comments

I am of opinion that in an encyclopeidia where the main definition is about HP calculators we do not can cite nothing at all about TI calcs. Speak here about TI Calcs or if my dog eats whale bones is the same thing, irrelevant and out of topic.

In a thesys about something, to compare it with another is always a low level discussion.

I disagree - the comparison between HP and TI calculators is a frequent topic of discussion, and when they're the two dominant vendors of personal calculators I think it is reasonable to (attempt to) describe some of the relevant differences between their offerings. This doesn't seem to be a main point of the article, although I suppose it could be split into a "see also: TI vs HP" article if somebody wished to do so. *shrug* Pyrilium (talk) 20:08, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Win vista / 7 workaround for Conn4x

I found a workaround to enable use of Conn4x (mostly) to communicate between Win7 and HP50G (presumably also Vista and 49G+), after some searching without finding anything that would work on my system. It involves using one of the USB drivers included with the (winXP) Conn4x package rather than the USB driver distributed on HP's pages for 7 and Vista. I added a description of this to the 50G section, since it is there (in the issues and criticisms section) that incompatibility between Conn4x is noted. I'm not sure whether this is the correct location for it. I'm not entirely sure that it belongs in this article, but it seems like a reasonable place for people to look. Comments appreciated. Pyrilium (talk) 02:24, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Stuff about college board and whatnot removed from the lede

I removed this from the lede:

Because these calculators features CAS, none of the 49 series are permitted for use in the ACT, the PLAN and some classrooms, though it may be used on all of College Board's calculator-permitted tests, including the SAT, some SAT Subject Tests and the AP Calculus, Chemistry, Physics, and Statistics exams.

It appears to relate to some examination or other (in which country?) It has little if anything to do with the calculator. --TS 04:59, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

I suggest you show up to take the referenced exam and see if you're allowed to use the calculator. I understand your desire to remove information that is referenced only by random internet folk ... but in this case they are the Reliable Source. I suggest you revert your changes. htom (talk) 05:25, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

No. Firstly, Wikipedia isn't about any one country so the exam rules pertaining to any country should be covered, if at all, in the article about that country's exams.

Secondly, the primary purpose of a calculator is to perform computations, not to be used as an accessory during an examination in a particular country. The removed text was only very distantly and tangentially related to the subject of the article, a particular range of calculator. --TS 06:13, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Issues, bugs, etc

I removed these sections because they were mainly about minor gripes and were completely unsourced, so they're not only unverified, it's impossible to assess them with regard to balance under the neutral point of view policy. --TS 05:10, 29 November 2011 (UTC)