tags:

views:

2019

answers:

30

I have decided to break down, and buy a calculator to use at work. One that I can hold in my hand. The features I want involve HEX/OCT/DEC/BIN conversion, and the basic statistical functions and solar/battery power.

I am primarily a CRUD programmer, I also do a little statistics work from time to time.

The question is three fold.

What other calculator features are of benefit to you at your job? What calculator would you recommend? What factors am I overlooking?

EDIT: While there are indeed a wealth of programs out there, I am looking for advice on the sort of calculator you can hold in your hand.

+13  A: 

I just use the Windows/Ubuntu calculator. If that fails, use Excel/OpenOffice Spreadsheet.

Spreadsheets are far more useful as a scratchpad for calculations than any calculator.

cletus
Windows with View->Scientific.
Tom Anderson
Win-R, "calc", <enter>
TheSoftwareJedi
View->Scientific is important, it gives you all the good stuff. Like HEX/OCT/DEC/BIN conversion
TheSoftwareJedi
Note, the calculator for Windows has been redone in Windows 7. I just launched it to check it out. Bad ass. It's got programmer and statistics modes in addition to scientific. Wow.
TheSoftwareJedi
@TheSoftwareJedi, nice.. thanks for the heads up.
Simucal
@Simucal - see my answer below for a link to it.
TheSoftwareJedi
Wow, I've gotten 4 downvotes on this answer but not a single comment as to why.
cletus
Sorry to hear that cletus +1
jmucchiello
cletus, the reason why is the same reason TheSoftwareJedi's one got downvoted I think. Because the poster specified only actual calculators and not software solutions. However, I find the question much more interesting when you include software options as well. +1
Simucal
Ctrl-Alt-C, never touch the mouse, don't even look at the keyboard, and this shortcut trick has worked since Win 3.1
gbarry
At first I was curious and surprised. But now that i'm sitting at a winxp machine, I am finding that key combination does nothing. Oh well.
Breton
A: 

The only thing a hand held calculator gains me is portability, instant on (no boot time) and I can poke it's buttons faster than I can mouse. From that, I tend to use a calculator when I don't have a computer for for fairly trivial things. I very rarely do any programming stuff without a computer handy and I can't think of anything that is specific to programing that I would class as trivial so I'm not sure if there is anything you could make a hand held calculator do that would be of any benefit to me (or enough I would pay anything extra for) with regards to programming.

The windows calculator (or just about any hand-held one) does fine for me on simple things. For everything else: Excel, MathCAD or something else like that. I don't think I would have use for anything in between.


old:

I'm not sure a hand held calculator could be of an specific use to me for programming (as in "Oh this will be nice when I'm programming") OTOH I do use one for general stuff and sometime that ends up being programming, but still nothing peculiar to programming.

BCS
What is there to down vote in this??
BCS
I didn't downvote, but your second sentence contradicts itself.
TheSoftwareJedi
looked at your edits. surely you see where the downvotes come from. "The windows calculator does find for me", contradicting sentence, STILL a misspelling of "programming"... Just my opinion. Again, I didn't downvote.
TheSoftwareJedi
Do people really downvote for spelling? (btw wikipida, Google, and FF think I've got programming right) and I'm not contradicting my self.
BCS
correction: All three things like *Both* spellings
BCS
What is the misspelling? I don't see it. "Programming" is correct, what is the issue? Anyway BCS, sometimes you just gotta let some answers go. I constantly cull my ill-received answers and delete them. Just my opinion. I didn't downvote
Simucal
Oddly, I'm mostly perplexed, not annoyed. I don't get why some people down vote some things and it bugs me.
BCS
+3  A: 

I have a extended RPN calculator on my phone (WM5-based) and bc is nice on UNIXes.

Keltia
http://mac.softpedia.com/get/iPhone-Applications/Tools-Utilities/HP-11C-iPhone.shtml IIRC the other HP-## models also exist
BCS
And here I thought RPN went out with the 80s...
cletus
+2  A: 

Why not use the computer? My favorite calculator is the TI-84 Plus Silver Edition:

http://education.ti.com/educationportal/sites/US/productDetail/us_ti84pse.html

Obviously, as everyone probably knows, it's very easily programmed.

Also, I typically use Google's calculator for most calculations I do on the fly.

BobbyShaftoe
The 84+ (or Silver, which IIRC is faster and has more memory) is good. But I would actually recommend the 89. Either way, though, you can't go wrong.
Thomas Owens
A: 

I would go for a standard, cheap, good old brand X scientific calculator. About 15 euros. And I would use bc, octave, matlab, python, R, whatever, when I need anything more than log(123+456).

Federico Ramponi
+1  A: 

I use SpeedCrunch, or GNU octave for heavier tasks.

gnud
+8  A: 

Google works fantastically well as a calculator, as does the search bar. In Firefox 3 it will give you mathematical answers as the first "suggestion" in the drop down even without hitting enter.

It does unit conversions, too.

postfuturist
Agreed, they've got a ridiculously large set of features available in their calculator...hell, it even does imaginary operations!
Salty
A: 

Did you try calc mode in emacs? It takes time to learn it, but it is very powerful.

bandi
+7  A: 

I still have an ancient TI-35-Plus which keeps going on its original battery after all these years, since only maybe every couple of months I will turn it on and do a Hex<>Decimal conversion. Plus which it does fit into your shirt-pocket.

pngaz
+5  A: 

I have three favorites:

  1. TI-83
  2. XP PowerToys PowerCalc
  3. HP Reverse Polish Calculators
j0rd4n
TI-83 is really great, I use it a lot. I wish there existed some similar software for android.
DrJokepu
A: 

If you're primarily programming in a scripting language, you may find the scripting language interpreter itself makes a good calculator.

I used to use the unix "bc" calculator. These days for most simple calculations, I launch python.

For more complex calculations, a spreadsheet is probably a better tool.

A: 

On Ubuntu I use Qalculate (http://qalculate.sourceforge.net/). Excellent calculator.

cbp
+4  A: 

I use an HP-48 for doing most heavy-duty work (I'm a grad student in chemistry) since I think in RPN. For light-duty stuff I just use a cheap TI solar scientific calculator. It's great for doing simple jobs like converting numbers and I won't shed too many tears if I lose it or spill stuff on it.

If it's for work, I'd err on the side of cheaper in case it disappears. I'd also consider getting something that uses batteries instead of solar. It's annoying when your calculator resets and loses your last result because some sheets of paper covered it.

If you need some heavy-duty statistics power, the HP-48 has specialized cards that you can buy. You might also go the high-end TI route. I'm not as familiar with the TIs, but I'd bet that there are software packages available for them as well.

Dana Robinson
+7  A: 

I use an interactive python interpreter.

recursive
Best software calculator out there.
Manuel Ferreria
A: 

I find spreadsheet in any even simplest form to be most effective. It is easy to work on large data sets with just few clicks, and easy to parametrize the equations, break them apart and so on.

Kamil Zadora
+10  A: 
TheSoftwareJedi
boom, +1. Nice find
Simucal
Why would someone vote this down? It is a free calculator, available for Windows Vista with a programmer mode built in! I don't get it
Simucal
It's missing the point of the question.
Breton
@Breton, Ah, I see, especially after his edit. However, the top answer right now gives software only solutions as well and yet is highly rated
Simucal
I only have one vote.
Breton
Breton -1. The point of the question is to find out what programmers use for calculators. Many programmers use the computer as a calculator. Fancy that.
jmucchiello
Their loss. See my explanation elsewhere in this thread.
Breton
+1; thanks for the link (I'm picking that up at work first thing tomorrow).
John Rudy
+1  A: 
Skeletron
Go launchy!! =:)
GONeale
+3  A: 

Old HP RPN calculators, like the 12C and 15C.

Ben Alpert
+2  A: 

TI-84 Silver Edition is the calculator that helped me survive Differential Equations. I grew quite attached to mine. It still lives in my desk at home.

If, for some reason, you decide that you don't want a "hold in your hand" kind of calculator, I recommend GraphCalc.

JustinT
A: 

Formulas for Mac. Very cool: set variables, lots of built-in functions, intuitive to use.

Mark Brittingham
+1  A: 

I use a Casio fx-85WA. I've found it has always been sufficient for the calculations I've needed to do, and it's not overcomplicated with graphing functions that I find I don't need very often as a developer.

David
A: 

c:\windows\system32\calc.exe

The advanced setting of the calculator helps with RGB colour formats and HEX codes.

Jobo
+2  A: 

I use Octave http://www.gnu.org/software/octave/ It's fairly heavy duty but I find it more Convenient then carying a scientific calculator around with me all the time. It's ability to convert between different number bases is also helpful.

Jared
Octave is a very nice free (as in speech and as in beer) Matlab replacement.
Adam Rosenfield
+1  A: 

I wouldn't use a hand-held calculator at my desk unless I was doing some calculation with a long list of numbers on paper. That said, my general purpose calculator is the one in my mobile phone. :-) But I have an HP-48 for when that's a bit too clunky.

Whilst programming, I usually just use the MySQL CLI I always have open.

staticsan
long list on paper? First thing I'd do is get it into excel: ORC, 10-key, whatever...
BCS
+2  A: 

Unix?

$ bc -l

Limbic System
A: 

There is some controversy over my downvoting in this question. I will explain my reasoning by quoting Jef Raskin, the late usability expert, and originator of the macintosh project at apple.

Calculator or Computer? It's true, Many of us keep a calculator beside our computers. Why do you need this simple-minded device when you have a whole computer in front of you? You need it because you have to go through contortions worthy of a circus sideshow in order to do simple arthmetic with the computer. There you are, tapping away at your word processsor, when you want to do a division: 375 packages of Phumoxx cost $248.93; what is the price for one package? On my computer, I have to open up a calculator window. To do this, I move my hand from the keyboard to the mouse, which I use to do a click-and-drag to open the calculator. Transferring my hands back to the keyboard, I type in the numbers I need or tediously cut and paste them from my document. Then I have to press a few more keys and finally copy the results from the calculator window into my document. Sometimes, the calculator window opens right on top of the very numbers I need, just to add insult to injury. In that case, I must use the mouse to move the calculator window out of the way before proceeding. It is much faster to grab the pocket calculator.

do not think just because you are a programmer you are immune to usability issues. Using a software calculator can be a significant drain on your time, and when you're a professional software developer, time is some serious money, yo.

Jef Raskin went on to propose a solution for a better software calculator. I did not downvote those that I thought were similar enough to Raskin's solution, such as using spotlight. If you're using Textmate, textmate has a feature which is almost EXACTLY the solution that Raskin proposed, that is, you highlight a text which represents a mathematical operation, and you press the "calculate" key on the keyboard. Since most keyboards sadly lack a "calculate" key, in textmate you use control+shift+c instead. All text editors should have this feature. it is sad if they don't.

Also, his son aza made a program called enso. If you have enso installed, you can highlight a calculation, (anywhere in windows), hold down the capslock key and type "calc", and it will perform the calculation, replacing the selected text with the result.

the quote continues

Using an experienced computer and calculator operator as my test subject, with his word processing program open before him, I measured the total time it took for him to pick up a calculator, turn it on, do a simple addition, and return his hands to the keyboard to resume typing. It took about 7 seconds. I then measured the time it took for him to use the built-in calculator. He had to move the cursor to the menu bar at the top of the screen, find the calculator program, open the calculator, enter the sum, and then click back in the word processor so that he could resume typing. This took about 16 seconds.

Breton
I could say the same thing for an actual calculator. I have to take my hand off the keyboard/mouse, find it, get it out, remove it's cover, turn it on, etc. It is a non argument. Also, that isn't how I open or use the windows calculator. My hand never touches the mouse.
Simucal
In Vista: Windows Key-"calc", enter. Proceed to enter your calculations using the numpad, never removing my hand from the keyboard.
Simucal
It's a non argument if you only decided ahead of time that the quote is wrong, and thus only bothered to read until you thought you had enough material to attempt to discredit it. It's a much better argument if you read the whole thing and actually spend a minute or two thinking about it.
Breton
But this is my own fault for pissing you guys off before I posted the quote. Read it on its own merits, not because you think I'm an asshole.
Breton
@Breton, I read your whole post. What you fail to realize is Jef Raskin's solution is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Launching a calculator from the keyboard is so stupidly simple that is a non-issue. Ensu style highlight/calculating is nice but I don't see it as a killer feature
Simucal
You're focusing on the launching, and ignoring all the other issues that jef raskin brings up, such as windows obstructing your view, application switching, and the manual task of copying and pasting the result, which is actually more significant than just typing in the result from a visible display
Breton
This ignorance is what has led me to believe that you didn't, and you still haven't properly read the whole thing.
Breton
can you remember the hotkey combination for your calculator, and then press it? Can you do that faster than you can pick up an object off your desk? Are you sure? perception is a tricky thing when it comes to keyboard shortcuts. Try it with a friend and a stop watch.
Breton
+1 for a thought out responses that I think is wrong. I can't think of anything that a hand held calculator can provide that a software one can't. Also I just did the test as described at the end: 3 sec using the windows calculator.
BCS
Re the other issues: alt-tab or enough screen space gets you past the calc over the data issue. -- All else aside the OP asked for a *programmers* calculator, anything that isn't simple math (a.k.a. anything that would be special to programming) I wouldn't use a calculator (either kind) for anyway.
BCS
@BCS software can do anything. I can't think of anything a hardware calculator can do that a software one can't, aside from be a physical object (has advantages). But it depends on the calculator. As I said before, I didn't vote down software solutions that I thought were decent enough. YMMV.
Breton
And worse comes to worse, we're programmers. If we needed something specific out of a software calculator, surely we'd make our own?
Breton
You downvoted a whole slew of people because you were convinced by some theoretical article that there is only ONE TRUE WAY? And now you're surprised that people don't like you? Oh, and btw, that ONE TRUE WAY isn't in my environment so...what? I'm out of luck? You must be very popular at parties...
Mark Brittingham
I wouldn't count an article based on a set of facts and measurements as theoretical. Make your own conclusion from the premise, but you can't make your own premise. I'm not surprised that people downvoted me. people don't like to be criticised. I'm not particularly popular at parties. I don't mind.
Breton
@Breton: I'm not one to criticize the late Raskin unless necessary, but understand WHEN this piece was written, vs. today's world. Many modern programmers have the ability to launch their calculator quickly, have it not obscure the text beneath, and be done. (ctd next comment)
John Rudy
I can do all of that on Vista way more quickly than I can even FIND my real desk calculator. :) Yes, the OP did want a physical calculator -- his choice -- but that doesn't make sense to most others here, and those opinions are perfectly valid. (As is yours; many of us simply disagree with it.)
John Rudy
It was written in 1999-2000. Computer interfaces have not changed significantly since then (aside from the introduction of OS X). Quite a lot of people still have calculators next to their computers. all the commenters seem deaf to the phrase "I didn't vote down all the software solutions". Oh well.
Breton
@Breton: I read that part, but understand even the difference between 10 years ago and now. Modern large screens and massive display real estate is a major change for most of us. In 1999, I felt lucky to have 1024x768 -- at work now I have 2560x1024 on two monitors ... No obscuring via soft calc.
John Rudy
And I keep one on my desk, too. But I can get to the software one WAY faster. What I'd LIKE is a good programmer-oriented sidebar gadget calculator -- completely solves all the issues Raskin mentioned by being always visible.
John Rudy
Most of us actually don't have high res screens like you. But even if we do, I think it's a mistake to count more resolution as "more real estate" without taking into account physical dimensions. more space doesn't solve the problems. May be matter of taste, but if you're used to tasting shit...
Breton
The point is that "More screen realestate" is just a bandaid. The problem is with the concept of an application window. I could go into more detail, or you could just read the book.
Breton
The concept of the application window? Now I'm curious for the more detail. If you have something like a Vista Gadget -- always visible -- it obscures nothing, and all that is required is a focus switch. Using a handheld calculator is fundamentally the same -- move hand, switch focus, go back.
John Rudy
(And why is screen real estate a band-aid? I get it if you're at 1280x768 at 13" -- as I am on the MacBook I'm typing this on -- but in the Windows world, it seems like 96dpi is moderately standard. Yes, I'm cross-platform.)
John Rudy
There's a big difference between switching "focus" on a computer, and switching your mind's focus onto a different object. One requires the operation of a mouse/keyboard, and the other doesn't. in raskin's THE the app window is applauded as a huge step forward, but fundamentally unable to support...
Breton
The number of simultaneous tasks, and the complexity of those tasks that we have nowadays. The problem with app windows is that they represent a modal interface. windows cause the meaning of specific gestures to change arbitrarily. This is harmful to habit forming. It's also the reason vi is so hard
Breton
Switching focus from the computer to a calculator is a natural kind gesture that we're evolved to do. Gestures against the calculator always lead to the same result. We can form habits around the operation of the calculator. Using a software calculator means that we're pressing a set of keys to ...
Breton
changes the meaning of another set of keys, then making our calculation, then using a third set of keys to change the meaning of the second set of keys back. We can't form habits around that second set of keys, because gestures against them don't always mean the same thing.
Breton
While habits are possible to form under such conditions, it's difficult because our expectations are often violated. The situation is worsened by the fact that the first set of keys and the third set of keys probably also change their meaning quite frequently.
Breton
For this reason you really want your calculator built into whatever ide/texteditor etc that you're using, if you're going to go with a software solution. This reduces the number of mode changes you have to make in order to do a calculation. Gestures retain their meaning.
Breton
I'll throw in one more thing. Modes also have the problem of communicating to the user which mode they are in, and when you have switched modes. This communication usually fails because the user is focused on the task at hand, and not on the mode indicator.
Breton
In raskin's solution, the number keys retain their meaning- That is, they cause a set of numbers/operators to appear in sequence in your text document. Highlighting some text and pressing the "Calculate" key is a single gesture which always retains its meaning. No modes.
Breton
raskin's THE also has a chapter on what he thinks is wrong with modern programming environments, and how to fix it. If you're a programmer, it's well worth the read just for that chapter.
Breton
I'll give you credit here; with all the context behind it, it's well-thought-out and fairly reasoned. I still disagree with the vast majority of it, although I will grant that Raskin's right (especially in a 2-monitor world) about the focus indicator being lost. That one happens to me frequently.
John Rudy
Not with calculators, but with switching between two "full-screen" (maximized; this may be a Win-specific issue) windows. Each on one display, Windows Vista is WAY too subtle about the active maximized window.
John Rudy
A: 

OS X's Spotlight has a calculator in it (I think it may have been an addition with Leopard) and I use it for my summation needs.

Slace
A: 

I have found, in my roughly thirty years as a programmer, that I almost never use a calculator. I had fancy calculators in high school and college, and I kept them plus bought others with the expectation of using them throughout my career, but it just has not manifested. I keep a calculator in my briefcase, and I have replaced it a few times over the past couple of decades, but I never pull it out to use it.

On rare occasion, I find myself opening the OS-provided calculator, but that is maybe a handful of times per year. I use spreadsheets to keep track of my billable hours, which is where most of my calculating goes. Beyond that, I maybe do a calculation based on the price of something listed on a web site, or check some figures relating to my pay stub.

However, I practically never find myself doing calculations related to my actual programming, unless I am actually programming those calculations (meaning that I am writing code, but not actually plugging in the numbers myself).

So, I never touched my fancy calculators again, and I have never used a computer-based calculator long enough to care about its UI.

Rob Williams
For what it's worth I have heard this same sentiment from Mechanical engineers. From what I have heard, the high end calculator market goes almost totally to collage students.
BCS
A: 

bc(command line calculator) on linux

kal
+1  A: 

I mostly just use the calculator app on my computer. However, I also have an ancient Casio calculator watch that happens to do binary/octal/hex (it's 27 function scientific calculator). I think they quit making them about 15 years ago, but if you can still find one, they're quite nice!

Brian Knoblauch
Forgot to mention that I've also started experimenting with using F# as a calculator as well. Not sure how to do different base operations in it yet though.
Brian Knoblauch