Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!udel!princeton!astro!michael From: michael@astro.Princeton.EDU (Michael Woodhams) Newsgroups: comp.sys.handhelds Subject: HP keys (was TI-81 Review) Message-ID: <2361@idunno.Princeton.EDU> Date: 9 Sep 90 23:53:35 GMT References: <33623@cup.portal.com> Sender: news@idunno.Princeton.EDU Organization: Princeton University Observatory Lines: 26 In article pedz@bigben.mpd.tandem.com (Perry Smith) writes: >>7. Tactile feedback from the keys. They have better spring-back than >> some earlier TI calculators, but not as good as HP [where it has >> seriously degraded in all machines after the HP-41, especially the >> left-shift key on my 48!] > >Agreed!!! I think the 48SX is better than my old 28C. The 28C was so >bad that I had to watch what I did and could not just trust my >fingers. Thats really bad I think. > >pedz I've just done a quick comparison of the calculators ready to hand, and the HP48SX seems about the same as the HP65, and both are better than the TI59. The TI still has adequate feel, however (IMHO). What annoys me about the 48SX keyboard is it's appearance. What ever happened to the wonderful HP keys that lasted from the 35 until at least the 28[C/S]? Why did they change to the boring, cheap looking keys? It's like Rolls Royce making cars without the silver grill. To whoever is out there in HP who has influence over these things, please give us back the old keys. (I also thought the book arrangement of the 28 looked very good because it allowed so many more keys. Menus are nice, but dedicated keys are better. However, I've never actually used a 28, so it might not be as wonderful as it looks for all I know.)