Just googled it... I could definitely use that type of calculator.

I'm surprised you've never used one. Of everyone here, I was sure you'd be the one who used them for years : )

I don't really use calculators much. I use Excel for most calculations or right a short piece of code to do the job most of the time. And for things on the fly, I can multiple and divide a 3 and 4 digit number in my head. Add and subtract is pretty easy out to about 15 digits. So no, but it is cool.

*write, not right

Yes, that makes sense.

I still need to do a lot of quick calculations for my research/classes that don't require writing code, but do involve a lot of exponents and logs, so I use a scientific calculator a lot.

The one nice thing about the 35s over the 32sII is that it displays 2 stacks on the screen at a time, so you can see both the numbers you're operating on.

I used to use a programmable calculator (TI-55 and TI-55-II) in HS and college, but that was just a normal scientific calculator with parenthesis keys for programming the equations.

Yeah, I have a TI-83 Plus from HS. In fact, I'm using it right now to grade an exam (as the batteries on my 35s just gave out). That's actually what prompted me to start this thread.

The TI is great, but I found once I entered Engineering, most problems were either:
a) so simple an RPN scientific was faster
b) so complex a real program, such as MATLAB, was needed.

So, this is the first time in a while that I've used my TI.

Oh, and both the 35s and the 32sII are programmable. Want a fun programming challenge? Try programming in RPN. It's a blast : )

The TI-55 was great for definite integration in Calculus, but that was a long, long, time ago in a galaxy just up the road forr where I live now. :-)

Seems to me RPN programming would be pretty cool and easier in many ways because it follows a more logical train of thought. But the question is, how many parameters it can hold in it's memory for something like a AVG() or MAX() function?

It depends.

The 32sII and 35s have 4 stacks. But, they both have memory addresses you could use.

There are also RPN graphing calculators which have 100's of stacks.

So...

35 enter
37 enter
39 enter
41 enter
33 AVG
would probably blow up?

Or just drop the 35 from the list?

It wouldn't blow up, you'd just "lose" 35. Unless you put it into memory and then recalled it. Unless there's some way I don't know about, it isn't the best system for large sets of data.

Well, much of my career has been staistical analysis programming of extremely large sets of numbers like the wind records for the last 100 years at the Cincy Airport with a recording every second for the last 25, and every minute for the prior 25 and once an hour for the first 50. I had to use Gaussian analysis on that mass of records to determine the worst case wind event for the next 100 years for Fernald. Talk about a big ass set of numbers...

Yeah, you're telling me.

The matrices I work with contain thousands to tens of millions of elements. Not small systems there, either. : )

I haven't used in on a calculator, though I've programmed using it on a computer. It's pretty cool.
I'm surprised nobody's mentioned the TI-89, though. As far as I'm concerned, that is the calculator that definitively made TI (and its arguably less efficient input notation) nevertheless substantially more useful for everyday calculus and physics tasks (including normal calculation) than any HP calculator.

Nspire is great. Try the full color 16 bit CX as well.

What do you do ABG that would have millions of elements? That would be tough, i think anything over 5 by 5 is tough.

Texas Instruments is the way to go. Have a TI-84 Silver Edition and a TI-nSpire CAS (new one with 3-d graphing). Both great calculators, although I feel that the 84 is more durable, maybe it's just because of the tough plastic.

@D33

I model nanostructures. The Hamiltonian of a 3 atom can have 1,000's of nodes. Making an entire system adds up quickly.

I don't understand the point of something like the CAS. It seems like overkill for most stuff and not as good as something like MATLAB for serious stuff.

What do you use it for?

Math class lol (what else ;P). According to my prof, we haven't "even explored the depths of the CAS"<---his words.

For element count, try 700 million +

I don't have anything that large. What are you doing with those data?

The TI CAS is incredible, and for anybody whose work will frequently involve a desire to do symbolic algebra or calculus, having such a thing portable is great.
As far at MATLAB, I don't really see them as analogous. MATLAB is not a CAS, and is thus distinctly inferior at CAS tasks compared to the TI calculators. A better comparison would be Mathematica. It admittedly is superior as a CAS, though not nearly as much as you'd think (for some integrals, I've had better success with the 89). You're quite right of course -- for the serious researcher in need of a CAS, mathematica or maple will ultimately be the tools of choice, but still, the 89 is undeniably handy for a dizzying array of things.
The other point of course would be that it's just got a pretty great processor for a calculator, so you can always get good software for numerics if numerics are what you want to do.

I'm with semck, the 89 is my bread and butter. Carried me through all the undergrad math courses and if I COULD FIND IT, I'd still be using it every day. I actually think I left it at the pub, having arrived straight from an exam.

@semck

You are, of course, right that MATLAB would not be good for CAS.

I'm just curious, because I see MATLAB and Mathematica all over the place, but I've never seen a TI CAS.

@abge,
Really? I see them all over. Not sure what to say, of course, except that your mileage may vary.
That said, I freely confess I don't use my 89 that much these days -- or Mathematica either (though the latter slightly more often). I'm mostly a pencil and paper man nowadays.

Yeah I've never seen a CAS being used.

I (think I still) have an HP-25 that I bought for $150 in 1976. It would overheat after about an hour and the LEDs would go into a jitter spasm. First computer I ever programmed....