3 ms·

This reminds me of graphing calculators in the late 90s when I was at school. I initially had a HP, but it took what felt like 500ms to respond when I pressed a

This reminds me of graphing calculators in the late 90s when I was at school. I initially had a HP, but it took what felt like 500ms to respond when I pressed a key. I switched to a TI-83 and it was chalk and cheese - instant response; you could even write programs in assembly. There was a small cottage industry of traded programs for it.

clankyclanker 6y ago
It's still there! https://ticalc.org/ https://ticalc.org/
wtallis 6y ago
HP's early graphing calculators definitely had very high latency. But they dealt with it properly, which PC's don't. An HP-48 series calculator will buffer dozens of keypresses, and handle them in-order as if the UI had been instantly responsive. So you don't actually have to wait for a menu or dialog box to be drawn to the screen—if you've learned the necessary input sequence to perform the task you want, you can enter it at full speed. The keyboards were also very high quality with great tactile feedback, so you didn't need visual feedback on the screen to know your key press had been registered.
- randogogogo 6y ago
  I'd pile on that the programmability of the HPs was amazing compared to the TIs. The manual for my HP-48sx was a chonkyboi but man could I do so much with it. Once I figured out how to calculate pitch frequencies for equal temperament (just a mathematical series) I was using the BEEP function (IIRC) to have my calculator play music.
- ptx 6y ago
  PCs used to do this, before GUIs got all asynchronous on us. Try it with the old-old-old-old-style start menu (the one from NT 4 and 5).
- snvzz 6y ago
  I own both hp50g and some TI calcs (86/89). I'd describe hp and ti as laggy and slick, respectively. The 50g is what I used in university, but now I seldom touch it as the 86/89 are so much more pleasant to use.
  - wtallis 6y ago
    Since the HP50g is running an emulator of the 48G, it inherits a lot of the UI lag. It also inherits most of the UI efficiency; in my experience, the keystrokes saved outweigh any remaining visual latency deficit relative to the TI-89. But that's contingent on learning how to use it well in the manner of becoming a power user of emacs, while the TI-89's UI paradigms and learning curve feel more like using Microsoft Office.
    - snvzz 6y ago
      >in my experience, the keystrokes saved outweigh any remaining visual latency deficit In mine, lack of responsiveness makes the 50g a non-starter. Anything less than effective immediate feedback is unacceptable for interactive use. That paradigm simply doesn't belong in a hand calculator.
      - wtallis 6y ago
        > Anything less than effective immediate feedback is unacceptable for interactive use. I feel like you're ignoring the presence of tactile feedback, which is in fact effective on the device in question. Possibly because basically no other electronic gadgets in your life give reliable tactile feedback anymore, so you're used to visual feedback as the only indicator that your tactile input was registered.
        snvzz 6y ago
        I use mechanical keyboards. I also use vim. I'm familiar with the concepts you're on about. I used the hp50g throughout university. I'm well acquainted with it and with typing faster and navigating menus faster than the screen can update. Regardless, there's literal centimeters of distance between keyboard and CPU. There's no excuse for the calculator UI to lag noticeably relative to the keypresses. I got the ti-89 out of sheer curiosity, mostly because it's 68k based. After using it just a little, it was obvious to me I wouldn't be suffering the 50g much anymore.
mmcgaha 6y ago
Meta Kernel solved this issue, but yeah, that was a real problem.

clankyclanker 6y ago

It's still there! https://ticalc.org/ https://ticalc.org/

wtallis 6y ago

HP's early graphing calculators definitely had very high latency. But they dealt with it properly, which PC's don't. An HP-48 series calculator will buffer dozens of keypresses, and handle them in-order as if the UI had been instantly responsive. So you don't actually have to wait for a menu or dialog box to be drawn to the screen—if you've learned the necessary input sequence to perform the task you want, you can enter it at full speed. The keyboards were also very high quality with great tactile feedback, so you didn't need visual feedback on the screen to know your key press had been registered.

randogogogo 6y ago
I'd pile on that the programmability of the HPs was amazing compared to the TIs. The manual for my HP-48sx was a chonkyboi but man could I do so much with it. Once I figured out how to calculate pitch frequencies for equal temperament (just a mathematical series) I was using the BEEP function (IIRC) to have my calculator play music.
ptx 6y ago
PCs used to do this, before GUIs got all asynchronous on us. Try it with the old-old-old-old-style start menu (the one from NT 4 and 5).
snvzz 6y ago
I own both hp50g and some TI calcs (86/89). I'd describe hp and ti as laggy and slick, respectively. The 50g is what I used in university, but now I seldom touch it as the 86/89 are so much more pleasant to use.
- wtallis 6y ago
  Since the HP50g is running an emulator of the 48G, it inherits a lot of the UI lag. It also inherits most of the UI efficiency; in my experience, the keystrokes saved outweigh any remaining visual latency deficit relative to the TI-89. But that's contingent on learning how to use it well in the manner of becoming a power user of emacs, while the TI-89's UI paradigms and learning curve feel more like using Microsoft Office.
  - snvzz 6y ago
    >in my experience, the keystrokes saved outweigh any remaining visual latency deficit In mine, lack of responsiveness makes the 50g a non-starter. Anything less than effective immediate feedback is unacceptable for interactive use. That paradigm simply doesn't belong in a hand calculator.
    - wtallis 6y ago
      > Anything less than effective immediate feedback is unacceptable for interactive use. I feel like you're ignoring the presence of tactile feedback, which is in fact effective on the device in question. Possibly because basically no other electronic gadgets in your life give reliable tactile feedback anymore, so you're used to visual feedback as the only indicator that your tactile input was registered.
      - snvzz 6y ago
        I use mechanical keyboards. I also use vim. I'm familiar with the concepts you're on about. I used the hp50g throughout university. I'm well acquainted with it and with typing faster and navigating menus faster than the screen can update. Regardless, there's literal centimeters of distance between keyboard and CPU. There's no excuse for the calculator UI to lag noticeably relative to the keypresses. I got the ti-89 out of sheer curiosity, mostly because it's 68k based. After using it just a little, it was obvious to me I wouldn't be suffering the 50g much anymore.

mmcgaha 6y ago

Meta Kernel solved this issue, but yeah, that was a real problem.