
Numworks: open-source, Python-compatible handheld graphing calculator - 0xb100db1ade
https://www.numworks.com/
======
Ecco
You may want to check out:

The whole calculator running in a browser, thanks to emscripten :
[https://www.numworks.com/simulator/](https://www.numworks.com/simulator/)

An interactive PCB viewer, in the browser again :
[https://www.numworks.com/resources/engineering/hardware/elec...](https://www.numworks.com/resources/engineering/hardware/electrical/pcb/)

Full schematics
[https://www.numworks.com/resources/engineering/hardware/elec...](https://www.numworks.com/resources/engineering/hardware/electrical/schematics/)

And of course the whole source code to the operating system,
[https://github.com/numworks/epsilon](https://github.com/numworks/epsilon)

------
dbcurtis
It should be pointed out that this is Micropython, not the Python that you are
probably used to. Micropython is great stuff, I’m a huge fan, but it is
different from CPython in noticeable ways.

They seem to have simply copied a source snapshot over; I’m not sure what that
means for incorporating updates and fixes to the Python system. Maybe they
needed a fork for some reason. I do wish their documentation gave a little
more credit to the Micropython project.

~~~
tyingq
The device does appear to be capable of receiving updates:
[https://workshop.numworks.com](https://workshop.numworks.com)

Concur on the credit thing though.

~~~
dbcurtis
Yes, you can update the device. My comment was more about how Numworks can
practically integrate Micropython updates. It seems like maybe it could be a
Git submodule so that changes were easier to merge. Tracking Micropython bug
fixes and enhancements is going to be very labor intensive unless I am missing
something here.

(Admittedly, I didn’t spend a lot of time nosing around Numwork’s source repo.
I _have_ spent a lot of time nosing around the Micropython repo to do my own
tweaked builds.)

------
smartmic
If you care about calculation/typing efficiency, you might also want to check
out RPN (reverse polish notation).

I am recommending the HP 35s. Once you are used to the notation, it is a real
pleasure, not only for old-school advocates like me. Added bonus: you will
gain respect for stack-based languages like Forth, Factor etc.

~~~
StreakyCobra
I tried the HP35s of a friend for a few days. It is globally a nice RPN
calculator and not too expensive for starting. But I don't want to get one
because this calculator have a quite long list of known bugs [1] that have
been sitting there for more than 10 years now, and HP hasn't fixed anything
yet!

If you are a grown-up children like me and just want a pretty expensive toy, I
can recommend the SwissMicros DM42 [2] (I'm not related to them in any way,
just a happy customer). The made an adaptation of the HP42s for the modern
world: «34 decimal digits of precision, with exponents ranging from -6143 to
+6144», based on the excellent Thomas Okken's Free42 [3], big and nice screen,
USB connection for loading/saving programs, save and restore of the calculator
state, and so on!

And being based on Free42 you can get the emulator on your phone and share the
programs with the calculator. You then have the same "calculator" everytime
with you, no need to get used to another program/interface on your phone.

[1] [http://www.hpmuseum.org/cgi-
sys/cgiwrap/hpmuseum/articles.cg...](http://www.hpmuseum.org/cgi-
sys/cgiwrap/hpmuseum/articles.cgi?read=735) [2]
[https://www.swissmicros.com/dm42.php](https://www.swissmicros.com/dm42.php)
[3] [http://thomasokken.com/free42/](http://thomasokken.com/free42/)

------
pietroglyph
It's always amazed me how, in 2018, TI calculators with software and hardware
from 10 years ago still cost $100+ dollars [0] and command a near monopoly in
US secondary schools (which, I suppose, is why they still cost that much). For
that price you can get a significantly more powerful and functional mobile
phone [1] (see 24K of ram vs. 2GB, 96x64 screen vs. 720 x 1280)!

The space needs competition, and I hope Numworks gives TI a run for their
money (the calculator is even allowed on the big standard exams), but schools
are so standardized on TI calculators (and generally slow-moving) that change
will be hard. Casio has also tried to break into this space with significantly
cheaper calculators (which are also allowed on standardized exams), but they
have failed to gain significant traction so far.

A relevant XKCD (of course): [https://xkcd.com/768/](https://xkcd.com/768/)

A related piece of journalism:
[https://wapo.st/1Cl0Vyf](https://wapo.st/1Cl0Vyf)

[0]:
[https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0001EMM0G/](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0001EMM0G/)

[1]:
[https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01H2E0KVA/](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01H2E0KVA/)

~~~
fafner
More like hardware from 20 years. Yeah I hope the TI monopoly gets broken.
Numworks looks exactly like the calculator I was dreaming about when I was in
uni.

~~~
craftyguy
Actually, more like hardware from 40 years ago. The Z80 processor was released
in like the mid 70s.

------
kfogel
It's not open source; the Hacker News headline is wrong. The Numworks web site
does not claim it's open source, by the way -- the problem is only in the
headline here. The license is Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial
ShareAlike (CC-BY-NC-SA), and the presence of the "NonCommercial" clause makes
it unambiguously non-open-source. If that clause were not present, CC-BY-SA
would still be an odd license to use for software anyway, but because of the
NC clause we never get to that issue.

~~~
marmaduke
Source appear to be on GitHub. Non commercial is not incompatible with open
source. It makes sense to me that to get the investment required to fund this,
you’d want sole rights to commercialize. Nothing prevents someone else from
building a cheaper DIY version as long as they don’t sell it. For example it
could be a local college class exercise to build these from scratch for local
high school. That’s not imaginable for the TI calculators (which these seem to
aim to replace)

~~~
kfogel
Source being on GitHub does not equal "is open source". Restrictions on
commercial use _are_ incompatible with open source. The Open Source
Initiative, which coined the term and evaluates licenses for compatibility
with the Open Source Definition (see
[https://opensource.org/definition](https://opensource.org/definition)), is
crystal clear on this point: if your license has a field-of-use restriction --
such as a restriction on commercial use -- then it's not open source. This is
why Numworks is careful not to describe their software as "open source", to
their credit.

~~~
PurpleRamen
It may not be "Free Source", but if the source is open in the sense if being
accessable, then for normal people it is open source. One organization using
words in a specific way, doesn't negate all other legit interpretations of
those words.

It's an unsolvable problem they created there.

~~~
cpks
Nope. Open Source is a trademark precisely to avoid this sort of misuse. It's
not a "what it means to whomever" sort of deal.

That was done in part due to intentional (and damaging, if ultimately
unsuccessful) efforts to undermine the meaning of terms like 'Free Software'
by Microsoft back when the FSF was a fledgling movement and Microsoft was an
evil empire.

I don't mean to imply negative things about the company. The license is still
a heck of a lot better than fully proprietary -- I love the product in part
for that reason -- but it's definitely not 'open source' or 'free software' as
the headline implies.

(I don't think the company claims it is either)

~~~
PurpleRamen
I'm talking about casual language-usage, like this headline, not commercial
usage. Open and source are regular words, and they still are regular words
when used together. Trademarks can't force people to talk as they want, it can
only force company to not sell everything as they wish.

~~~
kfogel
Yes, the term can't be trademarked, because they're both common English words
used in combination (and that combination has a somewhat older, unrelated
meaning, which further contributes to making the term untrademarkable).

But this isn't a trademark issue. No one has trademarked the word "carrots"
either, but if someone were to sell pencils under the label "carrots", people
would be understandably confused and annoyed.

It's the same thing here: don't call it open source if it's not. The software
industry relies on that term having a specific, well-defined meaning. That
meaning is _widely_ agreed on, which, again, is why Numworks themselves is not
claiming their stuff is open source.

------
zokier
Personally I feel like clamshell design would make lots of sense for these
more advanced calculators. At the same footprint you could have lot bigger
screen, and more/bigger buttons. As an added bonus the screen would be more
readable when sitting on a desk. I wouldn't think the marginally added
thikness would impact much something thats being carried around in backbacks
most of time anyways.

For some reason practically no calculators seem to have used clamshell design.
Does anyone know why?

Closest example I know of would be HP 200LX, but it is a full-blown computer
so it doesn't fit the requirements for education market. Looking at this side
by side picture with a graphing calculator, it is not difficult to imagine the
calculator keys being transplanted to 200LX to make a nifty new device.

[https://cdn.pbrd.co/images/HFcfXoM.png](https://cdn.pbrd.co/images/HFcfXoM.png)

~~~
NeedMoreTea
Casio have produced some. This old one:
[http://www.voidware.com/calcs/images/fx451m-1.jpg](http://www.voidware.com/calcs/images/fx451m-1.jpg)
There's been others since with the same basic design. They all seem to fail at
the fold because there is no hinge or much protection at the fold.

There was a pocket computer from a slightly earlier era
[http://pocket.free.fr/html/casio/fx-5200p_e.html](http://pocket.free.fr/html/casio/fx-5200p_e.html)

Trying to find an image of those I stumbled across the fx-9860G Slim that
seems to be current:
[https://www.casio.com/resource/images/press/fx-9860gslim_pre...](https://www.casio.com/resource/images/press/fx-9860gslim_press.jpg)

~~~
zokier
fx-9860G Slim matches exactly what I was imaging. Very cool. Shame that it
apparently was somewhat short-lived in the market (explains why I've never
heard of it). I'm half-tempted to fish one out from ebay.

There was also apparently fx-7500G in somewhat similar form-factor.

------
evan950
While the calculator itself seems really cool, I'm really perplexed by this
design.

I see little point to advertising it as something that can input and execute
python if it takes you at least 5 minutes to type

`for i in range(10): print(i)`

~~~
mnoronha
I think this tradeoff was to keep it compatible with Collegeboard's (archaic)
calculator policies, which forbid keyboards. [1] Being able to market the
calculator as SAT-approved is probably super valuable since most students
won't buy multiple calculators.

[1]: [https://apstudent.collegeboard.org/takingtheexam/exam-
polici...](https://apstudent.collegeboard.org/takingtheexam/exam-
policies/calculator-policy)

~~~
redwheelbarrow
It'd be pretty tough to use it on the SAT if you take most of the allotted
time trying to type out a function.

~~~
uneekname
While you're right about how long it takes to type a function on a calculator
like this, this calculator is a huge step up from the TIs kids use on the SAT
right now.

~~~
redwheelbarrow
That's valid.

------
nicolashahn
Virtually everyone that would own one of these already has a smartphone with
more computational power, where an app can be made, or already exists, that
does all of these functions or more.

Is the only reason for this to exist for use on a standardized test?

~~~
uneekname
Not only are standardized tests (and thus preparatory high school tests)
stringent against cell phone use, but companies such as TI have had a monopoly
on the market for a long time. It's great to see a competitor that uses a more
modern underlying language, that costs as much or less than the TIs do. I
really hope this calculator or something similar starts to catch on at
secondary schools in the U.S.

------
fmajid
No RPN, no deal, sadly.

Have a look at the Swiss Micros DM-42L, it's a thing of beauty.

~~~
kwhitefoot
Looks remarkably similar to HP calculators. Is this deliberate and is there
some connection between them an HP? If I had just seen the picture and not
seen the name on it I would have assumed it was HP.

------
Jyaif
This is one of the best crafted website on the internet.

------
ju-st
Does it run Doom and Pokemon like its TI competitors?

~~~
ivanfon
Found a video of an NES emulator running on it[1], so... Probably. It’s quite
a bit faster than the common TIs and Casios.

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDVeut56AJU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDVeut56AJU)

------
foolinaround
how does this compare in terms of capabilities, prices etc with existing
alternatives such as TI, etc?

------
florence123
"It is also permitted for use on the SAT by the College Board starting with
the August 2018 administration."

That's ridiculous. Privatized standard testing seems like a bad deal for folks
who can't afford these expensive calculators.

~~~
marmaduke
The point is that schools will only buy bunches of these things for teaching
if they’re approved for use on the exams.

~~~
florence123
The point is that it seems flawed that these are approved for exams, not that
this isn't a good business decision on the part of the company advertised
here.

