22 Jun
2011
22 Jun
'11
9:31 a.m.
On 19 June 2011 19:21, Tony Duell <ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk> wrote:
[Reasons why I use an RPN calculator snipped]
[Explanation cut]
Sorry, I missed this message until Jonas quoted it.
I understand RPN intellectually, but not at a "gut level" - as such I
find it a real pain to actually /use/ - & since there is no need to in
anything I use, that means I don't, and thus I never improve &
probably never will. A bit like binary or octal.
I'm intrigued. I don't understand, but
that's OK.
What don;'t you understand ? RPN, or why I prefer to use it? RPN is, I suppose rather differnt to many modern
computer products. The
latter seem to be designed to make simple problems trivial, but
unfortunately, they make complex problems very difficult or impossible.
RPN (and in gnerally the tools I prefer) makes simple problems pehaps a
little more dififcult (but is it really harder to type 2 2 + rahter than
2 + 2?) but make dififuclt problems a lot easier. Since generally I sue
calcualtors and computers for difficult problems that I can't solve in my
head, I prefer such tools.
Fair enough. I think you have a point there. There is some "dumbing
down" occurring in modern computers. Mostly, I'm strongly in favour of
making them simpler, easier & thus more accessible to more people -
but that does mean that sometimes, functionality is lost, & that's
obviously a damned shame. And occasionally enough to put experienced
users off upgrading altogether - as is currently happening with Ubuntu
and its new Unity desktop.
--
Liam Proven ? Info & profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/lproven
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lproven at gmail.com
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884 ? Fax: + 44 870-9151419
AIM/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven ? MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? ICQ: 73187508