HP 50g fails simple SOLVE. Comparing to TI-89, which succeeds
in [HP48]
|
From: reth on 13 Feb 2007 04:17 On Feb 13, 1:20 pm, "Helen" <GHMohia...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Feb 12, 8:53 am, "JBGM" <Literatron...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Besides, the example you give is hardly an example for a "massive > > > symbolic computation"... > > > But just an example of the device's mathematical capability. > > The example you gave has next to nothing at all to do with symbolics. > Somewhat unexpected if what you are interested in is symbolics. > > > The world is fairly rich and complex, so be less surprised when you do not > > understand causes and reasons; you might be missing the rest of the > > iceberg ;-) > > I won't comment. How you want to do your work is really none of my > business. > You may disregard my idle comment on this. > > > The algorithm is simple: if (estimated hours saved * personal labor > > hour cost per hour) - (cost of calculator + time invested in training > > * personal labor hour cost per hour) > 0 then go calculator. So far, I > > go calculator. > > Maybe your algorithm is a bit too simple... > > > BTW TI-89 seems to have superior symbolic manipulation > > capabilities FOR MY PURPOSE. Look athttp://technicalc.org/tifaq/?tivshp.htm. > > HP 50g seems fairly superior in numerics. > > I am familiar with the differences. I agree that everything depends on > your specific purpose. There are cases where the TI may be the better > choice, for others the HP is better. Since you can try the caluclators > via their emulators, you can find out yourself, and answer your own > question much more reliable than any comparison on some website could. > > Good luck with your work! Are you married, Helen? I bet you're not and never will be. :) reth
From: Veli-Pekka Nousiainen on 13 Feb 2007 05:16 "reth" <reth(a)abv.bg> wrote in message news:1171358234.989891.73100(a)h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > On Feb 13, 1:20 pm, "Helen" <GHMohia...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> On Feb 12, 8:53 am, "JBGM" <Literatron...(a)gmail.com> wrote: X > Are you married, Helen? I bet you're not and never will be. :) > reth Unless, Reth, you are talking to a male troll, who has plagued this newsgroup many years...
From: Steen Schmidt on 13 Feb 2007 06:15 Marcin Witek wrote: > >> What guess value for ROOT are you using on HP? > > Zero. > > With guess value of 0 my TI-89 Titanium computes this in about 9 > seconds, but with guess value of 1 it does it in just 2 seconds. Then you're using nSolve() and not Solve(). Regards Steen
From: Marcin Witek on 13 Feb 2007 17:16 Steen Schmidt wrote: >> With guess value of 0 my TI-89 Titanium computes this in about 9 >> seconds, but with guess value of 1 it does it in just 2 seconds. > Then you're using nSolve() and not Solve(). Hmm... With nsolve my results are about 6 seconds for guess value 0 and about 1~2 seconds for guess value of 1... Wit
From: Steen Schmidt on 14 Feb 2007 10:12
Marcin Witek wrote: > >> With guess value of 0 my TI-89 Titanium computes this in about 9 > >> seconds, but with guess value of 1 it does it in just 2 seconds. > > Then you're using nSolve() and not Solve(). > > Hmm... With nsolve my results are about 6 seconds for guess value 0 > and about 1~2 seconds for guess value of 1... Solve() do not provide a way to supply a starting guess, so you're using nSolve() for your timings. Since you didn't know that, I guess you were using the Numeric Solver app, which internally uses nSolve(). It's important to state how you solve a problem if we are to be able to compare execution times. Regards Steen |