
Old Calculator Web Museum - sbuttgereit
http://www.oldcalculatormuseum.com/
======
mschaef
Very cool... the Museum of HP Calculators is also a good one:

[http://www.hpmuseum.org/](http://www.hpmuseum.org/)

A more user-oriented HP site is here:
[https://www.hpcalc.org/](https://www.hpcalc.org/)

These were really amazing little machines, particularly for their time. HP had
a custom CPU architecture optimized for low power consumption and calculator
operations (think BCD floating point). By the time they got to the HP-28C and
-19B, they had a custom OS/Language that had elements of both Forth and Lisp,
and was pervasive throughout the software stack. (ie: the user programming
language was a subset of the same language HP used to program the calculator
itself.)

~~~
ghaff
I still think the HP-41CX was the pinnacle. I did buy a 28(something) at one
point but I didn't love it. It probably didn't help that, by that time, I
didn't really need a powerful scientific calculator for work and would just do
most things on a computer anyway.

~~~
mschaef
> I still think the HP-41CX was the pinnacle.

You might also have liked the 42S... it was built to be as a more direct
successor to the 41's. The UI is much more similar to the 41 than the
28/48/etc.

> I did buy a 28(something) at one point but I didn't love it.

The 28/48 was much more powerful, but it was also a fairly radical shift in
approach. The interface got heavier weight, with more to interpret on the
display, more keystrokes for many operations, and just generally more to
manage. I liked it, but in retrospect mainly because it was a portable
computer I could play around with during school, etc.

I think it's also the case that HP's interest in the calculator market was
falling off right as RPL (19B, 28, 48, ...) was hitting its stride. TI took
over the educational market starting with the TI-30 and TI-81, and computers
took over the professional market - so there wasn't much room anymore for a
professional HP calculator by the time the early 90's rolled around. (Or at
least not enough of a market for the calculator business unit to gain traction
within HP to fund its development efforts. My guess is that, as is often the
case, the opportunity cost of pursuing a relatively small market was viewed to
be excessive when there were other things to do.)

The contrast between the 1972 introduction of the HP-35 and 1993's 48-GX is
also striking. The HP-35 got developed because the 'H' of HP wanted it, and
even then, he commissioned market research studies and held back the usual
development funding. Once developed, the HP-35 sold well, even at >$2K 2016
dollars, due to the fact that the best alternative was either a slide rule or
a minicomputer. If it took that much political power within 1972-era HP to
sell a product with a such a compelling advantage, it's not hard to see how
badly the complete landscape shifted against further calculator development by
the time the 90's rolled around.

All that's to say that the RPL platform only got a couple rounds of
significant internal development funding by HP. At one point, I'd have really
liked to see what they could've done with another round or two of development.
And then I graduated high school, got more access to real computers, and it
didn't really matter any more.

~~~
ghaff
>You might also have liked the 42S

Those go for some pretty good money, don't they. I actually just picked up a
couple of things that I can hopefully use to repair my HP-41CV.

>The 28/48 was much more powerful, but it was also a fairly radical shift in
approach.

Yeah. I think that was the thing. I'd been using an HP-55 since the campus
store had some almost affordable overstock in about 1977. (When I started
college, I got a TI scientific calculator because the HPs were still so
pricey. Pricing dropped pretty radically over a few years.) I picked up the
28S at one point but I didn't really need a calculator by then for anything
fancy and I never got into the UI and clamshell ergonomics.

~~~
mschaef
> Those go for some pretty good money, don't they.

Yes, both the 42S and 16C sell for more than the 48's do these days.

------
macintux
My collection of RPN calculators. Sadly I have no reason to ever use them.

[https://www.dropbox.com/s/tovgotxn0lmmjg2/File%20Dec%2001%2C...](https://www.dropbox.com/s/tovgotxn0lmmjg2/File%20Dec%2001%2C%203%2042%2045%20PM.jpeg?dl=0)

~~~
tinbucket
Nice collection. I'm jealous. I missed out on the 15C re-release when it was
available. I don't really have a use for it, but I really did want one.

I've got a couple of 12Cs and an 11C. I use them occasionally, whenever I need
to do some maths that's not complicated enough to warrant firing up Excel but
too much for my feeble mental maths.

~~~
macintux
I don't remember how I was lucky enough to find out about the 15C in advance,
but I jumped all over that.

Several years ago I took a university final and the requirement was a non-
programmable calculator. I looked on eBay and discovered how expensive an 11C
would be, so I went to the professor and explained that I was by this point in
life incapable of using an algebraic calculator and pleaded to be able to use
one of my HPs instead. Thankfully he didn't care.

------
mvdwoord
Awesome! On a side note, if anybody finds themselves near Bonn (Germany), do
yourself a favor and visit the Arithmeum.

"The Arithmeum presents the history of mechanical calculating machines, as
well as the computing of today, in an aesthetically pleasing environment. Many
demonstration models invite the visitor to discover the historical milestones
of mechanical calculating, and at interactive multimedia stations the visitor
can develop small microprocessors in a playful way. Early highlights in the
development of computers are also exhibited."

[http://www.arithmeum.uni-bonn.de/en/arithmeum.html](http://www.arithmeum.uni-
bonn.de/en/arithmeum.html)

------
Karnickel
My grandfathers mechanical calculator (German):
[https://i.imgur.com/jBDUHPp.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/jBDUHPp.jpg)

He used it even though he had an electronic calculator. Common business
calculations seemed to perform much faster and more reliably than on the
electronic calculator (1980s). You had to check every single number and
operation you typed into the electronic calculator, but you could do quite a
bit without looking, just by feel, with this mechanical one. Multiplication
for example, you just turn the crank handle for each round.

------
Cbasedlifeform
Strangely (I think) this doesn't mention the Sinclair calculators, one of
which I purchased in the mid-Seventies and still have in a box somewhere. It
was minimalist but gorgeous. I'd like to dig it out now and carry it around...
would be v hipster.

It's long ago but mine might have been the Sinclair Cambridge Scientific:
[http://www.vintagecalculators.com/html/cambridge_scienific.h...](http://www.vintagecalculators.com/html/cambridge_scienific.html)

What hath god wrought!

~~~
Someone
That’s an amazing hack. Cutting a lot of corners, the entire program of the
calculator is 320 instructions, on a cpu that doesn’t even have a ‘multiply’
instruction. See
[http://files.righto.com/calculator/sinclair_scientific_simul...](http://files.righto.com/calculator/sinclair_scientific_simulator.html)

~~~
tdeck
If you like old calculator hacks, you might be interested to know that some
early calculators (such as those from Wang[1]) could natively perform only
addition, subtraction, e^x, and the natural log. So to multiply numbers, they
took e^(ln(a) + ln(b)). See also: factor combining [2]

[1]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wang_Laboratories](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wang_Laboratories)
[2]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CORDIC#Factor_combining](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CORDIC#Factor_combining)

~~~
golem14
That's numberwang!!

------
jacquesm
It's an interesting historical fact that the modern CPU was invented
specifically to power a desk calculator.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_4004](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_4004)

There is a direct line back from the Intel x86 architecture all the way back
to that 4004.

Another neat little item in the same line:

[http://curta.org/](http://curta.org/)

I've been on the lookout for an affordable one for the longest time but so far
no luck.

------
mnx
Interesting website, clearly a ton of work went into it. If you are like me,
and full length paragraphs are impossible to read for you, here's a handy
bookmarklet I use for such websites:

    
    
      javascript:(function() { node = document.createElement('style'); node.innerHTML ="body{margin:40px auto;max-width:750px;line-height:1.6;font-size:18px;padding:0 10px; background-color:#eee;}h1,h2,h3{line-height:1.2}"; document.body.appendChild(node);})();

------
mtve
You may check "Soviet Digital Electronic Museum" by Sergei Frolov:

[http://www.leningrad.su/museum/main.php?lang=1](http://www.leningrad.su/museum/main.php?lang=1)

------
owenversteeg
I collect old calculators myself! These old machines are really gorgeous
things, usually handmade (at least until the early 70s.) If anyone on HN has
questions, I'd be happy to answer.

~~~
Something1234
Which is your favorite? Do you have any really unique ones?

~~~
owenversteeg
Some of my favorites:

Mach 1 Slide Rulette - made in 1972, one of my older ones. Has a really nice
glowing green VFD, vacuum fluorescent display. Obviously very well made.

Sears M8 - made in 1973 by Sears, came in a nice black leather carrying case.
The side of the calculator has an orange stripe down it, which makes the whole
thing look gorgeous.

Sharp EL-827 - made in 1981, my #1 favorite, a musical calculator. It's fairly
quiet, but you can hear it in a quiet room easily. The keys each have
different notes for them, so you can play songs on it. I've learned a handful
of songs on it myself. A really tiny, little, gorgeous thing - slimline,
brushed metal, super thin. Just beautiful.

~~~
Something1234
Can you post some more about musical calculators? I've never heard of a
musical calculator.

~~~
owenversteeg
Sure. Musical calculators were initially made for the blind (so when you press
a key, you hear a sound and can tell what's happening.) When you press equals,
for example, the calculation happens and the calculator sounds out the tones
for the answer - for example, you enter 9x9=81, and you get (9 tone) (multiply
tone) (9 tone) (equals tone) and then the calculator sounds out (eight tone)
(one tone).

Eventually people started using them as toys or musical instruments, so some
calculator companies started making the sounds less robotic and more musical -
and now there are "musical calculators".

------
CGamesPlay
Numberphile just yesterday published a video on a pretty neat electronic
calculator:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BIx2x-Q2fE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BIx2x-Q2fE)

~~~
waiseristy
This calculator seems pretty popular [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fie-Z-
mjnyU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fie-Z-mjnyU)

------
dwarman
Still have ny HP41C, with XMEM etc, but no longer carry it with me since i41CX
came out for the iOS devices. Inludes all the rom extensions too. When I get
the energy the system is for sale - printer needs new batteries, card reader
needs TLC or replacing. I also had but sole an HP16 programmers calculator,
since there is also now an iOS (and OS X) version. PRG 16C. My first was a
Bowen around 1964/5, then an HP 35 in 73?. Sharp made what is likely the first
BASIC programmabe (actually they labelled it, I recently found several OEMs of
it) that really impressed me. I have no idea what happened to mine. Also have
still a Radio Shack Programmer's calculator.

------
zurp
I wish they had an emulator for each that would display values visually as
close to the original as possible. You could then test them each out to see
how the following result is displayed:

16017 * 5

------
tdeck
I spent hours on this similarly named website back in early high school:

[http://www.vintagecalculators.com](http://www.vintagecalculators.com)

Great details about old and exotic display and memory technologies too.

------
triptych
You can also see emulations of TI based calculators here
[https://www.cemetech.net/projects/jstified/](https://www.cemetech.net/projects/jstified/)

------
scrumper
Fantastic, and nicely written personal commentary on each one too. This is a
real treasure.

I think I like the Sumtronics Comptometer the most, for its excellent name and
its vacuum tube internals. The Mathatron is a close second.

------
tonyedgecombe
We had an Olivetti Programma 101 at school, I remember programming it during
maths. This must have been about 1979.

------
lasermike026
They are beautiful, aren't they?

~~~
jacquesm
The fully mechanical ones are amazing machines, algorithms frozen in gears and
levers.

~~~
flavio81
Yet there is also the Friden electronic, fully electronic but simply amazing
for it's time (1965?):

It had CRT vector display of numbers ... For 1965 on a table-top model!

And memory was realized via a mechanic delay line, where the bits traveled
around a loop, mechanically!

~~~
jacquesm
I just spent an hour reading that same entry, absolutely amazing tech for the
time and that they got that to work reliably enough for a mass market product
is really amazing engineering.

------
dboreham
Never understood the appeal of the reverse polish HP calculators. TI-59 all
the way.

------
rabidvermin
Fittingly, the design of the web pages looks straight out of a museum itself!

