Yes, the TI has more programs backing it up. But becuase this is not built-in it is a pain for me because my TI-Connect didn't work and I was too late in switching to TILP so I had to ask my friend to download stuff for me every time.
It's not like conic graphing is a really big thing for me anyways.
QuoteBegin
I did that, too.
But now after researching further, I am starting to get the picture that an HP calculator is the calculator for me. Here's my reasoning:
- Different types of entry: Algebraic (traditional TI), RPN (seems complicated but I heard it is good/efficient; not sure if I will be able to use it), Textbook (similar to EQW, but on an HP it works with the OS which even the TI Flash version couldn't do; I'm not sure how often I will use it, but it is a nice feature). Overall, the HP wins here.
- Graphing: The HP has more graphing options although it lacks Box-and-Whisker. This is not too important to me so it is not crucial to have every type of graph which it defintely doesn't have. Both TI and HP are equal.
Now onto things that
really matter to me:
- CAS: The HP CAS appears to be more powerful than the TI. This is due to the Erable CAS vs. Derive. More information
http://technicalc.org/tifaq/ti89vshp49.pdf. I know that article is old, but I remember testing my TI-89 Titanium and it still couldn't do some of the limits/integrals, etc. That is the type of math I will encounter in my multi-variable class next year. Looks like HP wins.
- Simplification: The TI has auto-simplification which is good. The HP also has this, but it has the option to turn it on/off (I don't think I would ever turn it off, but you never know...). The TI also simplifies trigonometric expressions, but the HP's versitility overcomes TI. For example, it's trigonometric expansion/collection is probably equal to TI's, but it can display answers only in terms of sine/cosine/etc. which is actually useful because many classes say: decompose sin(x)^2*cos^(3x) into linear multiples of cosine. The only way a TI accomplishes this is by running expand/collect and rerunning the command multiple times (using intermediate results) in hope of the answer. The HP doesn't support csc, sec, cot, but the TI doesn't support them in it's simplification either unless you download Tsimplfy. Looks like HP and TI are equal.
- Catlog: TI provides a Catlog of commands with syntax and support for Flash and user commands. The HP provides support for built-in commands and user commands (no Flash to my knowledge, I'm not even sure if HPs have Flash programs). But the HP also provides a brief explanation of the command and an example. TI commands are generally intuitive for me, but I'm not sure about some people. Since there are a lot of HP commands, this is a plus for HP. Looks like HP wins here.
- Algebra: There isn't much to say here. The TI is usually fast, but it sometimes fails. The HP isn't slow, but it isn't as fast as the TI. However, it doesn't fail as ofen (if ever; don't take it literally). In the end, HP's superior CAS wins.
- Calculus: Derive uses a table to calculate integrals and derivatives. This generally results in faster answers by the TI because the HP calculates input every time. However, complicated functions confuse the TI and it sometimes fails while the HP calculates. The TI has only one series command: Taylor which doesn't expand series perfectly. The HP has more versatile tools. The HP also supports additional advanced functions for computation including Laplace, Fourier, Hermite, etc. The only come backs to this that I know of are: Bhuvanesh Bhatt's MathTools and Calculus Made Easy (CME). MathTools is extensive, but not bult-in. And the strength of the program is proportional to the strength of the CAS. CME is also extensive, but doesn't have many advanced calculus tools. Thus, the HP has a clear victory, but it is a tie considering programs available for the TI.
- Number Theory: The HP has more features, again, than TI. MathTools compensates for this. So, HP wins by default, but MathTools makes it a tie.
- Symbolic: TI supports basic symbolic calculations with very good speeds. The HP also has similar support. The HP supports larger symbolic calculations with more ease and has support for symbolic eingvectors/values which the TI lacks. Looks like the HP wins here.
- Complex: The TI and HP evaluate complex numbers equally well. However, when it comes to applications of complex numbers (as in integration), the HP has clear victory.
- Step-by-step: The HP supports step-by-step help. I?m not sure how useful this would be for me, personally, but I?m sure others might appreciate this. The only similar option for TI is Symbolic Math (which doesn?t even come close if you really think about it). CME also has step-by-step work for integration and differentiation, but the HP?s wide support is better. So the HP wins here.
- Finance: I don?t know much about this except that both calculators have some sort of program built-in.
- Statistics: The HP has basic statistics features, but TI?s use of calculation limits and wide support beats the HP?s Statistics program. However, the HP has various programs to remedy this. So it looks like a tie.
This is all I can think of at this moment and I have to do my homework anyways.
EDIT: I've been getting used to RPN on my friend's scientific and I like it.
