|
ZurdoDev wrote: I vote trolling.
I think it might have been the other option. 
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
Go for it.
Did one ages ago due to lack of bits when converting to Bin from Hex or Dec.
Later calculators supported larger numbers.
Wasn't that arduous and didn't take up too much time from memory.
Then again my memory isn't like it used to be.
But the best thing with using your own calculator is if you require a new function, you can just add it.
Perfect.
"Rock journalism is people who can't write interviewing people who can't talk for people who can't read." Frank Zappa 1980
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly. I always wanted a return on investment at a certain interest rate over so many years button. I have done it in Excel, obviously, but I want a calculator button for it! 
...and how many calculators have spell check, eh?
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
Forogar wrote: how many calculators have spell check, eh?
You spelled the number 9 incorrectly.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
So were my first several OSes. Nevertheless, I agree with the sentiment in this thread that the calculator that shipped with Windows XP may be the best looking calculator. In contrast, the one that shipped with Windows 10 looks like a first grader drew the wireframe and the developer slavishly followed it. While I understand the objective of making it better suited to a touch interface, IMO, it should be sufficiently smart to figure out that my machine has no touch controls, and render a more compact window. As it is, the touch-aware calculator occupies more than its fair share of screen real estate. In spite of all its new modes, I still use only the original three (Basic, Scientific, and Programmer), and am annoyed from time to time that it lacks a critical fourth, Financial. Thankfully, I can coax what I need from Excel, but why must I load a full-fledged productivity application to perform a simple calculation, such as, e. g., compute the interest on a mortgage?
David A. Gray
Delivering Solutions for the Ages, One Problem at a Time
Interpreting the Fundamental Principle of Tabular Reporting
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think this applies to everything about the W10 GUI. It is horrible. If I wanted to use a table I that's what I would do. I think they should go back to the W7 UI or even XP. At least have those options as themes we could select. Everything is parameterized enough that they should be able to provide that capability.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
Rick York wrote: I think they should go back to the W7 UI or even XP
Agreed. And, they could easily switch the flatness on if they determine the OS is running on a pad/phone h/w anyways.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I use "Microsoft Calculator Plus", and am happy with that one.
The built-in win10 one is sh*t.
|
|
|
|
|
To each his own; I like the Win10 calculator.
|
|
|
|
|
Joe Woodbury wrote: To each his own; I like the Win10 calculator.
No. Not allowed. 
Interesting, really. Maybe more people feel that way than I would expect?
|
|
|
|
|
I agree, I like the Win 10 version more 
|
|
|
|
|
So many people who proclaim "ugly", "horrible", ... But not a single word to describe what it is that makes it ugly or horrible.
If those ugly, horrible designs where to be stepwise modified into a good-looking design, I'd be very curious to see the justitification for each modification step. Not just that "it looks nicer if you do it so-and-so", but why doing so-and-so is nicer.
"That is just sooooo 2018!" is of no real help to make good-looking designs for 2020. The reason people made it that way for 2018 is that they honestly thought it was a good-looking design. And they were not wrong: In 2018 it was a good design.
|
|
|
|
|
Easy UWP application.
Speaking of horrible do any of you use the UWP versions of Solitaire or Spider Solitaire?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: feel free to help improve it!
|
|
|
|
|
I hate the new design with that broad expanse of white space -- what on earth is wrong with having keys be clearly delimited visually?
Quote: --
He had bought a large map representing the sea,
Without the least vestige of land:
And the crew were very much pleased when they found it to be
A map they could all understand.
-- Lewis Carroll
|
|
|
|
|
Harrison Pratt wrote: that broad expanse of white space -- what on earth is wrong with having keys be clearly delimited visually?
This new design in boundaryless!
Unbounded and unlimited!
|
|
|
|
|
The worst thing about it is the presence of an equals key. That means it's not RPN...
|
|
|
|
|
I had no idea what RPN was. I looked it up and found Reverse Polish Notation and now I'm reading all about it on wikipedia. Very interesting. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
I had HP calculators in college, so, I'm hooked.
RPN uses a stack and post-fix operation. That means in stead of 3 + 5, you have 3 5 +. The former, called infix, is what typical calculators, the ones with an equals button, use.
The really nifty thing about RPN is that you can do complicated equations without having to keep track of how many left and right parentheses you've typed in as you would with a typical calculator.
This link https://www.cs.colostate.edu/~cs165/.Summer18/recitations/L15/doc/traversal-order.html seems to explain it pretty quickly. Probably more clearly than I am.
|
|
|
|
|
As long as my keyboard pad and GUI have mostly the same orientation.
Why did smart phones post 2007 not take the opportunity to align up the PC keyboard orientation and phone number keypad?
I actually had to check what the orientation was on my phone before suggesting they are flipped, because how often are people using the keypad that much now?
|
|
|
|
|
raddevus wrote: since they were designed so many years apart.
The error here lies in thinking anything from Microsoft is "designed"; traditionally, Microsoft applications have started as a programmer copying the functionality he has seen on another system. That application is then morphed by the alterations of other programmers, willy-nilly, for better or worse, over time.
|
|
|
|
|
Greg Lovekamp wrote: applications have started as a programmer copying the functionality he has seen on another system. That application is then morphed by the alterations of other programmers, willy-nilly, for better or worse, over time.
That's the Industry Standard! 
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
