HP 35s vs TI 36X Pro Feature Comparison

A comparison of the HP 35s and the TI 36X Pro, primarily looking at their functions, ease of use, and their suitability for use on the FE and PE exams.
One correction: the HP 35s in algebraic mode can edit the current expression, even after the answer is displayed. It just does not have any history so you cannot edit past expressions.

[@PeterHo8888]

This is the best comparison video of these two calculators I've seen. I currently have a TI 36X Pro and was thinking about getting an HP 35s for RPN, and it's nice to know that I can still enjoy similar functionality :D

[@west]

Thanks! I'd looked for a review when I was trying to decide, couldn't find one, so decided to remedy that by making one. I do think the TI is more user friendly in a way (it's pretty easy to muck your way through almost anything without having to remember much) but the HP is faster for most things, plus being able to store programs and equations is a really nice feature. I go back to the equation editor all the time and scroll through the formulas I've entered.

[@wb.c]

You should checkout the international TI-30X Pro Mathprint model. Basically an improved TI-36X Pro, better display, more memory, faster processor.

[@wise_man4479]

I love it i love it i will share your video everywhere and to everyone i know.

[@west]

WIse man Thanks!

[@JohnUsp]

Interesting comparison, thanks.

[@GeoCalifornian]

The power-off memory protection of the TI 36X Pro is indispensable, allowing you to continue your work when it auto times-out and you turn it back on; it's able to perform with complex numbers on the same stack as you would normal calculations without a need for mode change. But of course the equation editor on the HP 35s is a real amazing feature for serious students, too.

[@west]

Power-off memory has been a feature on all the HP calculators I know of since the 80s, so it is on the 35s as well, likewise the ability to perform complex numbers without mode change. Actually, the 35s and the 36X Pro both handle complex numbers very similarly, although with the 35s either rectangular or polar can be entered from the keyboard and on the TI it is rectangular only on the keyboard and polar is entered via the complex menu.

[@donaldweerheim738]

i am trying to store (initial) zero in 40.236 using indirect addressing. when i am finished and i try to VIEW 236 by storing 236 in I, and then VIEW (I), it says INVALID (I). can't work out why. At some stage i could not store 0's in these addresses, even though there are 800 available. i first stored a 1, indirectly (40.236) and then subtracted a 1 (40.236 STO-1). surely there is an easier way to successfully initialize these addresses to zero

[@eder4948]

I need to find the key (:) hp35scan you help me? Thank you

[@edusquisa9559]

Hi Guys, How to input infinity limit in TI 36x pro, example in integral function

[@thenewfire]

How did you program your 35s to do derivatives? And is there anyway to program it to do indefinite integration?

[@west]

Sure, the derivative is pretty simple and you can find the code for it at this link: www.hpmuseum.org/software/35derivp.htm For indefinite integrals, no I can't think of a way you would do that without some kind of symbolic math, and I'm not aware of a pure scientific calculators which does that.

[@west]

Sure, the derivative is pretty simple and you can find the code for it at this link: www.hpmuseum.org/software/35derivp.htm For indefinite integrals, no I can't think of a way you would do that without some kind of symbolic math, and I'm not aware of a pure scientific calculators which does that.

[@jessstuart7495]

You can do indefinite integration with a change of variables. X = TAN U and dX = dU/(COS U)^2 . 0° maps to 0, +90° maps to +inf, -90° maps to -inf, if you are in degree mode. I think it shows an example of how to do this in the manual.

[@nomadvehr827]

j, spoken like a true Electrical Engineer! :D

[@west]

I took a complex algebra class as an elective and answered the instructor's question with "j". He winced and then said very distinctly "we use i in this class." :)

[@nomadvehr827]

PS: I'm a Chemical Engineer

[@raspam]

@@nomadvehr827 ... so you can use "i", because you don't have to deal with currents :-D

[@donaldweerheim738]

@@west Hi Logan. is it possible to communicate with u on email about indirect addressing Don [e-mail]

[@jenselstner5527]

I would like to know how SwissMicros DM42 (a improved HP-42S) would perform against the TI-36X Pro

[@west]

I've lots of videos on the DM42. Definitely has the RPN advantage and makes a lot of things quicker, but the 36 probably has more features (without the programming capability). I'd definitely take the DM42 myself but I'm a fan of RPN :)

[@jenselstner5527]

@@west Yes RPN rules.

[@A5A5A5A5h]

Do you know any other brand(apart of HP) that sells RPN calculator?

[@west]

Aside from some weird prototype projects and 12c knockoffs, the only one I'm aware of is Swiss Micros, but their DM42 (which I have videos on) is really good. It's expensive but I use it daily. It's sad that this is the state of things but that's the way it goes.

[@A5A5A5A5h]

Logan West WOW Didn’t know of SwissMicros. It’s sad though that new calculators does not ships with this feature, but i don’t blame students for looking away from these HP RPN calculators, i really enjoy my 35S but it’s quite expensive and not capable of doing everything(so i wouldn’t use it for my exams). Also HP Prime’s RPN is limited to the non-CAS mode.

[@oluwaseyiakinwande1248]

What is the highest dimension of a matrix that TI-36X Pro can handle?

[@carloscm1323]

3x3

is it a pentel sharp kerry? nice choise btw.

[@west]

Indeed! I've had it for over seven years now and it's definitely one of the best mechanical pencils I've owned.

[@1paultv22]

I was just going to point that out. I have one 0.7mm and another in 0.5mm. I just wish the new ones had metal bodies like the older ones.

[@Styliiiles]

But my HP 35S can edit a calculation. Maybe this is a new future

[@amanuel3478]

Logan I have a question what mark do i need to get accepted to uni

[@west]

I don't think I'm qualified to answer this. I don't even know what university you intend in applying to.

[@adamthefallnone1817]

Can you do an auto repeat on this? Such as hitting equals twice to to use the same number, instead of say, .5555 minus .09183 equals equals?

[@west]

It's a comparison video so I'm not sure which one you're referring to and neither has an equals key. Hitting enter on both will repeat the previous entry/result.

[@adamthefallnone1817]

@west I actually commented on just hp35, but the video changed in the middle of my comment and it got sent to the wrong one. But, enter got it.. or just use a better scientific calculator. I do aerospace machining and my Co worker was trying to figure it out but I didn't have an answer, I only use my old school scientific that has an equals. Lol thank you though

[@lee3003xx]

which one can solve 3x3 system eq with complex coefficients?

[@west]

To the best of my knowledge, neither calculator will solve a system of linear equations with imaginary or complex numbers.

[@Taric25]

The 35s will do it, if you program it. A Matrix Multi-Tool for the HP 35s Programmable Calculator by Stefan Vorkoetter: www.stefanv.com/calculators/hp35s_matrix_multitool.html "Thanks to the HP 35s’ support for complex numbers, the matrix multi-tool works with complex matrices too." An Extension for Stefan's Matrix Multi-Tool Program by Palmer O. Hanson, Jr.: www.hpmuseum.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/hpmuseum/articles.cgi?read=886 Palmer's Matrix Multi-Tool Extension by mbrethen: www.hpmuseum.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/hpmuseum/articles.cgi?read=1197

[@west]

I put that on mine but the program is a pain to enter (takes several hours) and kind of a pain to use (make a mistake and you have to enter the entire thing over again). Plus, since the 35s checksum doesn't really work, it's very difficult to know if you've entered it properly so confidence is always low for me.

[@Taric25]

Very true, I wish NCEES would just allow a calculator for us that actually does this. We use modern calculators like the TI Nspire CX CAS on our homework but then face using these ancient relics on the FE exam. Years ago, the TI-89 was allowed before NCEES created a calculator policy. If you're in electrical or computer engineering and find a mesh or nodal circuit with three unknowns, good luck! It takes forever to solve by hand. There's honestly no point to requiring engineering candidates to use archaic calculators that don't accomplish tasks that modern calculators do in fractions of a second.

[@west]

Absolutely, it boggles my mind that my 30-year old 42s is superior in almost every single way to most calculators on the market today. They have been purposely dumbed down to be allowed on exams. Even the 89 hasn't substantially changed in the last two decades. Surely it could be cheaper/better.

[@johnbatchler8551]

How times have change for calculators in today's calculators it's ease of use vs yesteryear is programmablr

[@XTheDentist]

Ive always liked calculators, I like dedicated devices so when they ask why not just download an "app" I dont even bother explaining lol. I use the 89 titanium which is overkill but its a very pretty machine. I recently got the Hp Prime, which I will keep, but I know enthusiasts probably dont like it. I think these devices, if you are truly interested in building your math knowledge, will help you do that by making it more fun. I know my exam scores have been going up since Ive invested more time into understanding these calculators. Anyway, I want the Hp 35s because I think its the closest thing to a pure calculator plus the added functionality, programmability & of course RPN, I want a nice RPN calculator that doesnt have all the extra bells & whistles that a graphing calcuator has, it looks like just a solid fun to use scientific calc with RPN. Btw how about the 48g? Might as well get the 50g instead of the 48 right? I definitely want one of those because well...I dont have a solid reason, I just would really like to explore the 50g lol.

[@west]

XTheDentist If it is at all within your budget, it sounds like you would enjoy the DM 42 as much as I do. Pure RPN programmable that is superior to the 35s in almost every single way. Just a real joy to use.

[@XTheDentist]

Logan West Ok thanks, I will look into the DM42. I saw some videos before but didnt look into pricing yet.

[@XTheDentist]

Logan West Btw I just bought a 36x and saw some videos dating back many years regarding a glitch. It appears they havent fixed it but after investigating further, it even does it on the fancier TI84. Try using pi anywhere in the mixed number template, say 1 pi/2. You get an error if pi is anywhere in either the whole part, the numerator or the denominator. For example, if you do 5_1/4, the 36x will give you 21/4 which is correct. Now if you do 21pi/4 you will get approx 16.49, still good. Now if u press [math] [1] this will switch to mixed mode for fractions so when we enter our expression of 21pi/4, instead of an error, it gives us 5_pi/4 which is incorrect, 5_pi/4 is 5.78 and 21pi/4 is 16.49. Im wondering if the 35s does this because the HP Prime does not do this based on how the templates are designed: the mixed template has a plus sign sitting between the whole part and the fractional part which basically avoids this whole problem simple as that. In order to get the 36x back to the default, you have to hold the on button and press clear, that way it wont give you incorrect mixed numbers when pi is involved. I dont know if any of this is making sense lol.

[@west]

Interesting, thanks! I don't know on the 35s since I don't have it anymore.

[@seanwool]

Am I missing something here? Does the HP35 really cost 10 times what the TI costs? I like RPN and that conversion feature on the HP might be the only thing I've seen that would be faster than my old TI85 (I'm going from C to F and in to cm constantly), but 300 bucks? What makes this thing so expensive?

[@west]

Wow, is that what it is costing now? I think it used to be $59.99

[@seanwool]

@@west That's what the Google search yields anyway. After watching your video (great video, by the way), I was going to buy one right there. Not for that though. I don't suppose you know of any other calculators that have unit conversion that accessable, do you? It's just a matter of time before my TI85 dies.

[@west]

@@seanwool I'm going to have a series of videos on it soon, but Swiss Micros is releasing the DM 32 which is a modern version of the HP 32S ii (which I do have a series of videos on). It has some great unit conversion functionality as well. It is on the expensive side but I think it would last a lifetime and is a very nice machine for every day use (and has USB functionality for loading or offloading programs).

[@raveshdadalani]

Very interesting I still love my Casio 991ES Plus though

[@farhannoor3935]

Ravesh Dadalani ex is better

[@yeety1208]

Yes but it feels cheaper imo

[@amramjose]

A minor detail is the 35s goes for around $60, if one can find a new one. The TI36 is under $20. A pretty good deal considering what one gets.

[@west]

To be sure. The main advantage of the 35s is the programmability (it's the only programmable calculator allowed on exams like the PE) and RPN, if you're into that. But the TI is quite serviceable.

[@arcade_signal]

Late on this but on the 35S you can press the left directional key in ALG mode to edit your equation after getting a result. You still can't go back to previous ones though AFAIK

[@west]

I have a video on the 35s equation editor. You're correct about editing the equation but I'm not sure I understand what you mean by not being able to go back to previous ones. You can enter equations into your list and scroll up and down to view (and edit) them all. I have 13 currently entered in mine and can scroll through and edit any of them. You mentioned ALG mode though, which I haven't really used so perhaps you're speaking about something else?

[@arcade_signal]

At 0:40 when you're comparing the ALG mode you say "I can't go back and edit this" and say that pressing the directional keys would take you to stepping through the program. Up and down do this but pressing left lets you go back and edit it, though you're right that in ALG you can't go to previous computations as you can on the TI. I don't use the ALG mode either but I just gave it a try when watching the video.

[@west]

Oh yeah! You're right. Thanks for pointing it out. Still doesn't have a history of operations like the 36x Pro, but better than I thought. Clearly I didn't spend too much time with algebraic mode :P

[@west]

I went to add a note in the "show more" box and found I already had...last year apparently. Clearly I didn't remember doing that :)

[@arcade_signal]

Oh my bad, I almost never think to check there

[@dgm2006]

The 35s hardly even came with a manual. Mostly just a CD you need to refer to, or get printed out. The papers said I could get a free manual by calling a phone number. When I did they said they weren’t offering that anymore.

[@west]

I found that incredibly disappointing as well. I used my TI-89 manual a lot and was glad to see they at least offered a printed one for the 35s on request...or not. Still selling the calculator with the claim but won't stand by your word? Not a confidence booster.

[@donaldweerheim738]

mine came with a manual

[@hdofu]

@@west good lord I remeber the ti 89 titanium manual, printing it out in college.... It was about as thick as a phone book

[@latmask00]

Design wise HP35s i beutiful. The TI, not so much.

[@MultiKidsplay]

the HP design hasn't changed in 30+ years. It is beautiful

[@ukrainiansturgeon8561]

Could be less round 4/5 stars.

[@marcostalfors5850]

That °K on TI-36X conversion menu is almost making me cry! Kelvins are not degrees!

[@west]

True that! But perhaps that would be confusing to those poor freshmen college students ;)

[@fouellet1701]

Big difference, the TI is CAD $30 and the HP is CAD $100!

[@west]

Right, but if you want RPN and the ability to write programs, the HP is your only choice. I agree it still shouldn't be that expensive though!

[@AureliusR]

@@west I just don't understand why people like RPN so much. It's slower, less intuitive, and even the HP guys admitted algebraic entry was better back in the 80s but by that point they had tied their "brand" to RPN. Also, if you want a programmable calculator, there are still lots of options besides the HP-35s -- which isn't even made by HP!

[@petermikus2363]

@@AureliusR comes down to preference i kinda like rpn

[@Campo_]

Love my 35s and wouldn't have it any other way :)

[@west]

I wish it had a few of the features the older calculator did. My biggest sorrow is over its size (it's needlessly bulky) and reliability. I've had the vector bug come up a few times and yesterday, during the PE exam, it kept missing keystrokes. It was disconcerting because I would be typing and it wouldn't register a digit and if I didn't catch it, the answer would be wildly off. Never had that on any of the 30-year old HPs but this 3-month old one has it :( Still has a lot of nice features though. Really like the equation solver with its 2x2 and 3x3 and how it works with integration and such.

[@Campo_]

Logan West I have noticed it not catching keystrokes. But pretty rough when it comes to pushing buttons so it's not that big of a problem with me.

[@chapotito01]

check www.swissmicros.com. This guy got the 41CX, 11C, 12C, 15C and 16C emulator and created calculators with the 15C layout. He is working on an HP 42S prototype. He started with the 15C layout, but no one liked it. Now he is moving with the vertical layout with a much lager screen. He is using the Free42 software to run it, I think. The 42s was a nice non-graphical RPN calculator. None of this will be acceptable for the exam though. I am still partial to the 48 series that was carried all the way to the 50g. I haven't tried the Prime, but totally is different. Maybe, if I feel like experimenting, I buy one this summer.

[@Skirmitch]

I have serious troubles in this area. I'm a HUGE fan of the 48+ but that's not fair since it was the first ever scientific calculator that I had (bought it when I started in the uni) and I'm pretty sure I have never ever used more than a 10% of its capabilities. The biggest problem it has is the size. I'm also a big fan of the 42 buuut I wonder how much the hype influenced my opinion, I can't say for sure tbh. The only thing I know is that I NEED and absolutely NEED RPN (or RPL) and I can't stand a calculator without it. What I would love to have and that would be THE calculator for me, is to have a 48G+ one with an onboard python interpreter. Right now as I'm poor, I use the Free42 app on my phone for normal calculations and for crazy stuff I have a connection to my pc's python interpreter in another app so I have both, Python and RPN in the same device but nothing, I repeat, NOTHING in this world compares to the feel of those hp keys (like those on the 48G+)

[@bolleke702]

You actually can edit your equation in ALG mode by pressing the left arrow...

[@west]

That's already in the description box :)

[@bolleke702]

Logan West I missed that :) I like your videos though :)

[@joshuagardner894]

The 4 top of the line scientific calculator offerings are the Casio 991ES Plus ($20), Sharp W506X OR W516X depending on the market you are in (they are both identical, just marketed for different markets) ($20), the TI 36X Pro ($35) and the HP 35s ($45), prices are US prices and about what they cost on Amazon. They each have different benefits, the Casio is my recommendation because its is dead simple to use. The TI is the next easiest to use as it is primarily menu driven and it is also the most understood brand in the education world so teachers will have no trouble showing you how to use it, the Sharp has MANY more features but REQUIRES the manual to understand it (it performs more than twice the functions of any of the other three mentioned calculators, its only limitation is no reverse polish notation which HP has patented and is not programmable as I recall), and finally, the HP which is worth having if you are using RPN or need to program a few easy formulas. I own all four of these calculators and use them all depending on what needs I have at the time. Worth noting, I also own the 3 top of the line graphing calculators, the HP Prime (rechargeable lithium ion battery, touchscreen, standard graphing calculator keypad) ($110), the Casio Classpad (INCLUDES 4x triple A batteries, limited keypad, giant touchscreen to be used with an included stylus) ($140), and the Ti Npsire CX Cas (no touchscreen, full keyboard, tho not qwerty) (rechargeable lithium ion battery) ($140-$150). All 3 get around 100 hours battery life. Avoid the HP Prime, it is incredibly difficult to use, requires command line style input for any special types of functions, even something as simple as factoring. Personally, I like the Casio (I am by no means a fanboy here, its why I own 7 different calculators, because I couldnt decide which I like) but the Ti Nspire is quite good and intuitive, primarily, the Nspire is menu driven and the Casio is icon driven normally, icons bug me but Casio has managed to make the icons and symbols understandable. The Nspire has a nice benefit of being able to EASILY program right from the calculator, unlike the other two models because the Nspire has a keyboard on the device, the HP uses a modifier key for every keypress to get a letter (ugg) and the Casio has an onscreen keyboard which consumes alot of screen real estate. The HP Prime has one redeeming benefit, its fast, REAL fast, so if you are doing graphs, it is amazing for that as well as finding your intercept points. For students, I can say without reservation, Casio 991ES and Casio Classpad, if you can swing a second graphing calculator, the Nspire is a VERY close second to the Casio Classpad. Ease of use is most important, especially on a test where time will be a factor.

[@joshuagardner894]

Forgot to mention, the HP Prime has two models, make sure you buy the more current 'wireless' model, lots of guides on the web for how to determine which you are getting, but you want the newer model as it has a test mode feature so professors in the know can limit the calculator if needed. Also keep in mind, many math classes dont allow the use of graphing calculators because of their programmable nature, and the ones I mentioned above are even more questionable because they support CAS (Computer Algebraic System) which can solve equations for you, something you are supposed to be learning!! These are all very capable machines, many will poopoo them compared to the Ti-89 ($140),the HP 50g ($70), and then there is the beast, the mother of all calculators, the TI Voyager ($225 and has been discontinued). the newer replacements (HP Prime, Casio Classpad, and Ti Nspire) are just as capable as their older counterparts, its all just about UI. Many prefer the way you 'used' to input things. 10 years from now, our generation will be saying the current top of the line models are still the best 10 years from now. Dont get caught up in it. Oh yea, make sure you update the firmware on these top of the line models as well because they continue to fix bugs and add features and functionality every 6 months.

[@west]

Sounds like you enjoy calculators, I have 12 different models but am working on thinning that down :) I have different goals than you, I'm not a student, I'm an engineer and have no need for a graphing calculator. I'm going to use MATLAB for that. I have no need for data entry, I have Excel for that. What I do need is a nice, quick scientific calculator for doing something in a meeting or just to check on something really quick and most calculators today fall flat on that. The 36x Pro for example is fairly easy to use, you can figure out most things on the fly (though you often have to hunt for it on the keyboard, the HP 50g is really bad about having to hunt too), but the 36x Pro also is extremely painful to use for things like base conversion. Even the HP 35s is bad at that though I like its equation editor. I think the HP 35s and the TI 36x Pro AND the Casio are all lacking a bit in that respect. But those are really the only ones allowed on the FE/PE exam, thus those are the ones I show here. That's my focus in this review. I feel like many calculators these days are dumbed down in order to be sold to the biggest market: exam takers. Even the older calculators had I/O ports to back up programs and such, but you'll never see that on a calculator sold for exams like this. My personal (current) favorite calculator is the 30-year old HP 42s, which I still don't think has been matched in many ways. It was designed for engineers, not to sell to students, and it shows. It's also much smaller than any of the graphing calculators and can actually be carried in a pocket! I still like my TI-89's equation-solving capability, especially with multiple equations in any entry format (not just matrix), but I honestly rarely use that anymore. I looked in to the Nspire and the Prime but just don't have a need for one.

[@joshuagardner894]

The Classpad is touted by many engineers as being great for real world situations, albeit, it's overkill for what you need. It was a matter of ocd more than anything. I wanted to make sure I had the best for what I needed and something future proof. As a student, I love the nspire, outside of school, it's not so good. As a programmer, I love having the ability to just write a program on a whim. As an example, I had a couple hours in the office with nothing going on so I decided to write a program to find primes with as few calculations as possible, it keeps my brain sharp. Turns out I discovered a little interesting tidbit about primes I didn't think about, square a number and round down to nearest whole number, then divide by primes to the squared number. Any number up to 100 need only be divided by 2,3,5,&7 to determine if it's prime (square of 100 is 10 and so only need to divide by primes up to its root). Anyway, got sidetracked but I enjoy the programming side of these things since my phone works just fine for data entry.

[@mfm1537]

"but the 36x Pro also is extremely painful to use for things like base conversion." No It's not. If I do a lot of base conversions like for speed [km/h -> m/s] I use "Stored operations" operator to store and recall my variable [or variables]. 1. I press 2nd button and then set op, next I go to convert menu and choose my km/h -> m/s, press ENTER, and Voilà. For example I want to quick compute 25, 60 and 120 km/h to m/s, I just enter my 25 and press 2nd + op = 9.94 m/s, 60=16.666 m/s and 120=33.33 m/s Cheers!

[@west]

Marcin F. Michalski You are talking about unit conversions. Base conversions are converting say from octal to hexadecimal.

[@AureliusR]

From what I've heard, the 35s has suffered from many, many failures. Common complaints are the buttons just not working, seeing garbage on the screen, going through batteries due to a bad batch of calculators that constantly ate power... I've only had my 36x Pro for a few weeks, and I agree the menus can be a bit slower. But at least TI still makes their own calculators, and they're decent quality. HP doesn't even make these calculators, they just stamp their brand on calculators made to their specification. Kind of sad to see HP a ghost of its former self, but at the same time I've always preferred TI calcs so I can't feel *too* sad :P

[@west]

I would say that the problems with the HP 35s are not nearly so bad as some would have us believe.

[@DANNY40379]

@@west I've had HP calculators all the way back to the 80s but had to give up on the 35s because of the key press issue, I would press keys with the same force and it would register and other times it would not. In the end I had to look at the screen after every press and my confidence in the calculator diminished over time. Sad because for a rpn calculator it was a very good machine.

[@Justanotherdude25]

I had a 36 pro that just straight up gave wrong answers, switched to a diff one and it was fine

[@scottfleming2166]

I’ve used a 35S for the past 6 years, it’s been fine

[@alexandrefaccifeijo5377]

This HP 35 S works with matrices of complex numbers, but de Texas 36X PRO des not!

[@MichaelKingsfordGray]

The TI uses postfix a lot! It is a confusing mixture of infix and postfix.

[@west]

I agree, I always found that odd.

[@galfert]

Pentel Kerry..... Crikey Noice!

[@west]

Ha, it's a nice pencil! I didn't think anyone would care but you're probably the second or third person to mention it.

[@adrianhachis]

Las texas son muy buenas, pero no entiendo porque les hacen diseños tan feos, porque esa mania de hacerlas tan gruesas, como si fueran un game boy :/

[@west]

Estoy de acuerdo, son feos.

[@yeety1208]

Gameboy lol

[@manny3549]

80s mentality somehow

[@galfert]

TI-30X Pro MathPrint fixes the look and is much better in many ways.

[@hotchalupa]

I wish TI would release an updated version of the TI-36X Pro with TI-BASIC programming, link port, and at least 32KB user available memory... It would make for an excellent platform for user programs when graphing isn't needed!

[@west]

There are so many improvements that could be made to current calculators, unfortunately they cater to the education market and they won't allow anything with storage or connectivity :(

[@leemontgomery7914]

RPN rules.

[@SourStrawberrys]

You indicated that the TI was better in the first 60 sec. I don't like that it has not history.

[@west]

I said that for “algebraic notation”, the TI is superior. And it does have history so I’m not sure what you mean.

[@SourStrawberrys]

@@west I was talking about the HP, when I mentioned "not having history". Hince why I said the TI is better. You read my comment wrong. I said in my first sentence that the TI was better. I meant I don't like that the [OTHER] one doesn't have history.

[@west]

@@SourStrawberrys Er...perhaps English isn't your primary language but I disagree that I read your comment wrong, I think your sentences are just malformed. "You indicated that the TI was better in the first 60 sec." (I did not. You inferred or concluded that based on your preferences.) "I don't like that it has not history." (Since the only subject mentioned heretofore has been the TI, then this is logically referring to the TI. This is an improper sentence anyway.) Not entirely certain what the point of your initial comment was but I assure you the fault is not with me :)

[@SourStrawberrys]

@@west I started taking college courses in middle school, graduated at the top of my class, and now a mechanical engineer. Do not play that "English is not your first language" game with me on social media as if I am uneducated. I take that as an insult. And let's not act like this is a term paper. I did simplify my comment as I was writing a quick reply to the video, however, you did in fact interpret it incorrectly. Me simply adding more words to those SAME twos sentences gave more clarification. Maybe it confused you when I simplified it in such as way, but you should have been able to put two and two together to see that I wouldn't claiming something better and then saying I don't like something about it right after that. The "logical" conclusion would be to tell that I was clearly talking about the OTHER item when talking about the "negative". "I did not. You inferred, or concluded that based on your preferences." Do you not know what the word "indicate" means? It doesn't mean you flat out said it was better. It means to "demonstrate or suggest" such. You did in fact demonstrate that when you showed that one has history and one does not. I told you the point of my original comment when I clarified in my reply to you.. The fact that you're still questioning it, means the problem is in fact you.

[@west]

@@SourStrawberrys "Sorry my comment was confusing." No problem, man. As to English, I have no idea who you are or your background so I was attempting to be understanding, not insulting and I am sorry if it came across as snooty. However, I did NOT read your comment incorrectly, you WROTE it incorrectly. It's not comprehensible if you were intending to convey what you have since clarified, so saying "you read my comment wrong" is a bit of an insult itself. Just admit your comment was confusing or written in a hurry, and move on, don't try to shift the blame to me :/ Each calculator has pros and cons. One of the cons of the HP is that it doesn't have a history, but that does not mean that I indicated it was a better calculator. It may be for you, but personally (and a lot of other people think this too), the ability to write programs and use it in RPN is a huge pro, outweighing the lack of history. So no. I did NOT indicate the TI was better, although I'm more than willing to grant it suits some people better.

[@Majibu101]

I think the Casio 115Es or 991ex would be tougher to beat. The TI in my opinion is terrible In terms of how fast you can preform things in it.

[@joseangelhr]

In other words: Don't waste your time and money buying the $300 HP 35s. Just get the TI 36 Pro for only 20 bucks.

[@west]

The HP 35s was $59.99. And it's strong point is it is the only programmable calculator allowable on the FE and PE exams. But sure, draw your own conclusion based on your needs.

[@Isaac-gh5ku]

Texas Instruments should have been a global franchise, and TI calculators should be available in Europe and the rest of Asia.

[@betaorionis2164]

One is RPN, the other isn't. Case closed.

[@west]

Indeed, only some will disagree as to which side the case is decided on :)

[@jeanyvespochez]

these calculators are still very very very far away from the hp prime, that went out in 2013.

[@west]

Yes, but these calculators weren't designed to be top of the line or anything like that. They were specifically designed to be allowed on very specific tests, and as such are dumbed down to the point where they qualify.

[@chapotito01]

The 35s is an HP botched attempt to have NCEE to accept a fully programmable calculator. HP dumbed down the already basic HP 32SII to achieve that. They could have done a much better job. Anyway, I think it still is the only programmable calculator you can use for the exam. The TI is still not really programmable. If you learn the HP RPN programming and are able to do program on the fly, then the 35s is the calculator to use. Not counting that I consider the solver on the 35s much more advanced than the TI. I don't think any calculator can match the HP Solve invented back in the 80s and still strong today. However, if you need the built in functions, conversions and the such, the ease of use and not having to go through learning RPN then the TI would be your choice. I took my FE long, long time ago. Back before they stop letting you use fully programmable calculators, I used my 48GX. The truth is that with the speed you need to do the FE and the PE exams, you really do not have time to be looking through catalogs of conversion, equations etc. If you have to do that, you are not ready for that exam. The calculator will help you naught if you do not know the material already.

[@west]

I agree on all points. I dumped the 35s as soon as the exam was over and my 42s is my calculator of choice. I'm really looking forward to the Swiss Micros version.

[@donaldweerheim738]

@@west i had a 41CX which i seem to remember had more memory, program steps and the rest. i think i could even add on memory and have a huge capacity. it was beautiful for programming

[@west]

@@donaldweerheim738 Yes, it's sad that in many ways, the only handheld calculators available any more are neutered versions made for students taking tests and not ones for working professionals.

[@johnpeterson7264]

It’s a shame about the keyboards on TI calculators.

[@davyderaeve7301]

they're rubbish, always have been, especially compared to the vintage HP's.

[@ghgjftythnhcfghdty]

No RPN, no want.

[@robertf6409]

35s looks ancient

[@west]

I think the operative word here is “retro” :)

[@petermikus2363]

K think i looks nice like the design much more then the one of the newer calcs (Sorry for the grammar englosh isnt my main language)

[@cool9282]

RPN lost its edge with new calculators. It needs more buttons to press and was only a thing when the capabilities and memories where limited. This isnt the case anymore.

[@west]

Not sure what you mean: RPN has always required fewer button presses (no parentheses, for example). It’s also considerably easier to solve for any variable in an equation, no matter its position. It definitely still has some advantages. I moved from exclusively having used TIs to now almost exclusively RPN calculators because I recognized some of those advantages and appreciated them.