Hi I'm excited. Its calculator review time. having done one of those in a long time. Um, have I ever done a calculator review? Who cares? I'm doing a calculator of you.

Um, you know I Love Casio calculators. Yes, this one in the middle here is a Tandy but it's just all the Tandy calculators rebadged Cassio's and these two are pre a VP em. So these are the traditional algebraic entry calculators. This newfangled one, the Casio FXR 991 E^x which is an absolutely awesome calculator, but uses the V Pam rubbish, the visually perfect algebraic method, which is quite all right.

if you've got a formula I do actually like V Pam if you have a formula that you want to solve and enter it in to see that you're actually so in the formula. But for everyday calculations I Much prefer the traditional algebraic entry casio calculators like this, but the problem with these is that they're actually quite big. I Mean, look at the modern ones. Sure, it's got a full line display and everything else sometimes.

I Just want a small form-factor calculator. That's why I Also have this beautiful little casio FX 260 Solar calculator. Let's have a look at it here in terms of that size and it really is quite. you know, significantly smaller.

Yes, it misses an extra row of function buttons on here, but more than makes up for in size. And this is your traditional algebraic entry one. Unfortunately, they discontinued this sir quite some time back and I thought there wasn't a replacement at all. and I Love this little beast! It's great.

but I just realized they've got a new one. look. They've released the FX 260 Solar. -.

Oh I Can't believe it. Brain spankin' new. All of like I believe 899 us. a retail price your mileage may vary was much more expensive to get this here in Australia Very expensive actually compared to the U.s.

A retail price. but I Had no idea that they actually redid this one in the new form factor as we'll take a look at but it's and ident it's the identical calculator. So let's go and have a look at the differences between the 260 Solar and the brand-spanking-new this beautiful. The FX 260 Solar - also ridiculously confusingly known as the FX 82 Solar - in Europe but in America and a lot of other places its FX 260 Solar - just like the original.

Why they like put the FX 80 - because well, that's the original model. they're trying to get brand mileage out of that. Anyway, the new one comes in with a new hardcase. just like all the new brand new.

Cassio's there we go I Don't particularly like the white. not a fanboy of the wider doggy's that's causing an exposure of my camera to go. absolutely crazy. Anyway, yeah, it's got the new style.

Um, sort of like let's take a look at it. It's kind of like this kind of. It does have a nice feel to it, kind of like a textured sort of you know, metallic type feel. This one? not quite as good as the FX 99 one here.

Alright, close-up shot of that. For you texture fanboys, you can. Yeah, you can see it that. Ah Bobby Dazzler Well, you either like it or you don't look at that.

That just reminds me of like a qubit gameboard. But yeah, it's got the new look. It's got the new font on the keys. Look at this.

They've changed the font entirely between the two ideal whether or not it's more readable. I Don't know. I Think the original 260 Solar has more readable like the orange on there of the orange. secondary shift function designators are much easier to read than the ones on the new one.

That's just my take on that. Anyway, yeah, I can see that on camera? Yeah, that's about what it looks like in real life. But apart from that, it's basically an identical calculator. Size-wise it's a little bit a little bit wider.

Not happy with that. Not happy. Jan But lengthwise, it's actually a little bit shorter, so it makes up for that. And it's maybe a little bit thicker as well.

But apart from that, look at the key layout. It is absolutely identical to the original. Fantastic. And they've gone from your traditional rubber keys like this on the old school ones to this new.

The newfangled are plastic keys and they've even added a bit of Roundy on there. Look at that round and round bit a wanker II happen in there. but anyway, whether or not like is there a difference in the plastic keys yet they feel different I like it's totally personal preference. Maybe the newer ones like a bit feels a bit better, but it makes more noise like the plastic not sure if you can hear that when you're banging it whereas the rubber one is more silent.

So if you're trying to do some stealthy calculations then the old school rubber ones A bit better than the newfangled plastic. but anyway, it is a decent feel and I haven't missed any keys on this yet as much as I try. So as I said, the great thing about this is just simply the size. It is like truly pocketable.

You can't actually whack it in your pocket, take it around in your lab coat and it's a Bobby Dazzler for just you know, a little on-the-fly calculations and no, I'm not gonna use my freaking newfangled smart phone. Can't beat a new proper calculator. So as you can see like the functionality is absolutely identical. But I will say they do actually sell a version of this called the FX 260 Solar 2 in F and the NS stands for no fraction and they literally just like take blank out.

the fraction key over here doesn't have an ability to display fractions, and obviously there's a market of our fraction haters out there, but now these are all driven by our school requirements. You know specific courses and things like that. You know the education departments have requirements. you can't use a calculator and we can, but it can't have fraction capability.

So MIT they just did a model that actually remove that. It's very common in the market. They've been doing it for four years, but the biggest difference is in the display. Look at the size difference this bad boy.

I Love it. The decimal points really displayable, and in terms of readability at different angles, it's actually better. It's better. Ah yeah.

All right. Well, careful of the light. Yeah, but that's a beautifully readable traditional reflective display. I Love it.

Fantastic. But I Got to admit, there are some people who don't prefer the taller digits like this. I'm kind of one of them. I do prefer the squatter ones like that, but considering it's got the larger display and it's kind of clearer.

I'm not going to quibble. it's not too bad. and just like the original, it uses a ten digit mantissa two-digit exponent. Yeah, good enough.

Australia Now, because the functionality is absolutely identical on these, you can have a look for yourself. There's absolutely no differences whatsoever. I Presume that they would have used the same basic, but have a look. Let's do 69 factorial, which is the most you can get in a ninety nine digit exponent.

It's a heck of a lot quicker. so whether or not they're using the same ASIC and just up in the speed, well there that just rolled a new one perhaps? um, maybe a new pro same ASIC but in a new process geometry? maybe I Don't know if then you'd have to re mask and like overclock. Now if you actually compare the functionality of the pocket to Sixty Solar - compared to that like a more full function Casio then yeah, you're missing a few stuff which might be important to you. Stuff like you know, base conversion, binary octal, hex, and decimal stuff like that, and you know, logical operators and or not an X XOR and all that sort of jazz.

but you know, apart from that, not a huge amount of difference, but it still got the important stuff like the engineering notation our beard. In this particular case, they're actually shift functions whereas the other Cassio's ever have one or two dedicated keys here and it doesn't have multiple work instance like some of the higher end ones do. It's only got the one basic memory memory in memory core, but you know, for a pocket cow, that's all you want. and it's still got your rectangular to polar, polar to rectangular conversion.

Still got your statistical stuff, permutations and commutations and stuff like that. but it doesn't have like our engineering exponents like you know, milli, micro, mega, and nano and all that sort of stuff you might get on a more full functional. but as I said for a pocket couch, it's still alright. But for me the drawback of these pocket ones is because they've got less keys available so less dedicated stuff compared to this Tandy one here which is almost ideal, not quite ideal, but in my case it is pretty good.

It's got the separate engineering keys here or as you need the shift functionality over here it's got the in you know the super important inverse key as a primary key here, whereas you have to do shift inverse over here to actually get that. but this one's still not ideal because the other most used key for me is the XY register shift of course. and once again this is its. XY is still a shift on here, but over here it's still a shift and I use that like you know, daily but it does have the squared key here but doesn't have separate square root.

that's a shift function and you lose a key for the on one here and you know the fractions. I Don't want a bloody fraction button I Don't want a degrees minutes, seconds and believable in the hype button. Don't get me bloody. Well started on the hype button.

The most wasted button on any calculator. Unbelievable why they still do it I Don't know who the hell uses hyperbolic slit? No one that requires a dedicated key with no other shift functionality to it. Unbelievable. but hey, I learned to live with the ID 9 I do I Cassie Hokies a long time ago.

but considering that you get it in a pocket size I'm not complaining. Well, kind of am. but still I'm ok with it I sleep at night. so if I was able to change this layout, what would I do? Well I assume in that people want to keep the fraction key I'll give you that ok the fraction key piss off of the degrees minutes seconds off the hype key.

Bloody Hyperbolic rubbish. I'd Move the XY register, swap key onto a dedicated one, the one on X onto a dedicated one I can we squeeze square root in somewhere? Come on. You can probably argue that I'd swap the X Y for the square root. Yeah, I'd do that.

No workers. But it goes without saying you're not going to get the fancy pantsy stuff like in this particular case. We've got a complex number mode there. it is a real imaginary and everything else.

So yeah. I like you're not gonna get that in it. but if you want that, you're got a spring for the casio. FX 61 F Because in my opinion, this is the greatest electronics calculator ever made.

Once again, still not an ideal key layout, but it's got a pair. A little button. The only other calculator in existence with the parallel button is my own micro calc beauty. Look at that.

There it is. Parallel this to shift functions. Perky. Had to do that to get it down into the size form factor.

anyway. I'm not here to fanboy over the FX 61 F but I'm telling you should get one, but they're hideously expensive on eBay Now How? because they bloody will make him anymore and Casio would not return my emails they call humans on the phone. They would not return my emails about reintroducing this and letting me you know a rebadge it if that's a possibility. they couldn't even say nah.

Bugger off. Dave does have the modes not sure. can see. There you go, that's a bit hard to spit.

how are you doing? It's bit hard to see. One thing it doesn't have is like an engineering mode though. So unfortunately like we can put it into what scientific mode for example, now if you don't know how SCI mode works or scientific notation mode, then you go mode eight and then you select and the number of significant digits that you want. So if you want four significant digits there they are and it always displays your result in scientific notation.

So if we go 8 divided by 9 for example, 8 point 8 nine times ten to the power of minus one. But unfortunately it doesn't have engineering mode. so if we want to go to engineering notation, we have to press shift ends to actually get that. So it's yeah, it's got scientific mode but not engineering notation, mode, Bit of a bummer, but that's all right.

Or if you simply want to fix your number of digits, then you can go mode seven and three like that to fix your number of decimal places and it doesn't display in scientific notation and like it doesn't force it into scientific notation anyway. So if we do 8/9 again, we get that instead of times ten to the minus one. And yes, for all you calculator forensics fanboys who want to know if potentially the two processes in these are the same I'll link to are the RS key website down below for the calculator forensics, it's been dubbed which is a sequence of operations and you can do on a calculator. and then there's a huge database of results to see if I - potentially two calculators say that share the same chipset.

So what it is is nine sine cos ten arc tan. Okay, cuz like sine and that's a result there. We'll do it on the original one today. They're different.

They're different chipsets. They changed it. Why? Potentially Maybe so that they could do the no fraction version I Don't know if they ever had a no fraction, an NF model version of this original one, but they're definitely using different chipsets because we've got a fundamentally different result. But the good news is the new Solar Two is actually better.

Because it's closer to nine, the ideal calculator would take you back to nine, it's just doing these sequences. Operations just shows up an accumulation of like the decimal point calculation system of the floating-point calculation system inside the chipset as you build them up and you're supposed to be able to reverse the process and get back to precisely nine. But we don't check it. This is very interesting.

The FX 61 F gives exactly the same result is the FX 260 Solar, and so does this mysterious Casio over here gives exactly the same result. Yes, there is a couple of segments missing there. so the new Casio is obviously using a new chipset or a new you know algorithm in the chipset that does that calculation. But as I said, it is better.

But it's interesting that these three here are exactly the same. And for those curious to know, yes, it is different again on the new FX 991 ax. once again, a closer result down to nine down there. But don't Yeah, very different.

So it's not. Even though and like it's in the new style, it's brand spanking new, but clearly using different algorithms. and both of these are a hundred percent solar-powered I Think it's 50 luxe is this spec might have to check that. Anyway, the old one fades out pretty quickly.

Look at that. The new one actually stays there quite some time. In fact. I can keep going.

look 69 factorial. Still still doing the hard yeah, let's look at that. Alright. started to fade now.

69. Come on, you can do it. Ah, lost it. but it came back.

and because it's only solar powered, that's why the on key is here. even though Lucky Loser key to that. Basically there's no other shift functionality on it either. It's basically like a hard reset key because sometimes you might see like random segments that might power up weird or power down weird and then power back up weird and get weird segments on the LCD You just can't predict when the voltage on your chip is just like don't like just draining draining.

you know, a way. very slow. You can't predict what's going to happen there and it obviously doesn't have that greater reset circuitry built in. Don't an extra capacitor? Jeez, No Cut Cost: an extra cent quarter of a cent tenth of a cent? Desi's n So let's with this bad boy open and we'll compare it to the old model one.

Have I torn down the old one before? Not sure. Anyway, let's see what we expect is all membrane construction chip directly on membrane. Don't expect a PCB I think I've done its hair down of the 99 Winery ex haven't I I don't even recall what's in that anyway I'm Casio are the absolute masters of low cost calculator construction? Absolutely no doubt. So let's get inside this bad boy Gama that's new bloody fingered case.

Got a got a pried off do I It's my only good fingernail. There we go. we're in like Flynn Hang on there, we go. No, we have a PCB Made a fool out of me.

It's not all membrane construction. maybe like a lot of the old school ones. They actually Acacio transitioned over to the membrane construction, presumably because it was cheaper and simpler, but they seem to have come back to. well.

you know it's not gonna be a high quality. you know, fiber glass in there, but you know it's probably the cheapest one they can get. but dumb. Anyway, that's fascinating.

They've gone back to good old. um, fiberglass? PCB for that. Lots of test points on here. It's all chip on board.

of course, there's basically nothing else. It's got the solar cell on there, and that's about all she wrote and yet they've heat staked it down, bugger. But we do have a couple of passive caps on here, which is rather interesting. Check it out and there's one unpopulated that's interesting.

Hmm. Anyway, let's open up the original. Alright, let's lift it off so your more traditional case tomorrow. Yep, Ah, Sanyo.

there you go. Genuine, sinuous solar cell for those playing along at home. But this is the interesting part you noted before that I've actually restored its charge longer when you cover it up the solar cell, but the pre the old version has a bigger literal in it. Cap on there and it still couldn't do the business.

So is the new ship-like much lower power perhaps. and interestingly, we don't know. We've got two ceramic caps over here and nothing else by the looks of it. whereas this one, it's got all these different cups in here.

Why is it so I don't know. Anyway, it looks like we're talking 1990 vintage are we? And this one looks like it's 47th Week 17 so you calculate a smell Oh reset I'll tell you what if I shoot those two pads out, it doesn't damn well reset it, they go into the wrong one. I'm going to positive. Obviously got to do it to ground my poor.

Yep, got it. So sorry for all you keep red membrane fanboys but I'm not gonna watch really off the heat steaks in there. this is the only one I got I Want to preserve it? It's not that exciting anyway, but you can see the evolutionary difference in there. You can definitely see the size in the actual weight differences in size of the case there.

it's just, you know, the big plastic surround which kind of makes it, you know, almost equivalent in height size but hasn't changed a lot in what over 25 years or whatever it is that this one's been out I think Anyway, so it's interesting I just expected all membrane construction but PCB great, no workers and by the way, yes it does feel like a well flexible briquette. Danny I'm putting a lot of torsional force under that thing and and it's just handling that hunky-dory it feels a little bit better than the original. the original one feels like it's gonna with the just the split case. like that feels like it's going to snap whereas there by you know, you probably saw the rigid mouldings inside that case in there and it's It's just a bit more rugged than the original.

I Like it. Okay, let's test the solar cells. see where switches on I'm down at ten Luxy It might look very bright on camera, but my camera is really gained up here. and as you can see, neither of turn on a 10 Lux So let's let's up the ante.

They're a bit 20 odd Lux Hey look starting to turn on. You saw it. Yeah, look, it's starting to turn on. Ah, barely barely.

but it's yet. Look, it's it's on. It's on 69 Factorial: Where is it? There we go. It works at 20 Lux So it does just work on not really.

but the new solar - is a beauty if we take that up to 30. Lux And now we're talking. Now we're talking. it's still the LCDs Still not nearly as bright on the old one, but it does work so no workers, huh? Come on.

Ah, slow a wet week. Oh Bailey Look odd. Used all the juice to do that calculation you saw. Wow Wow Really, it's just it's sucking all the juice out of it and if you do, - I was just gonna fade up.

Yeah, Beautiful. I Think your profit I think the spec is about 50 Lux or something like that. but they're easily operates under that and even down at 20 Lux. Look, we can get rid of that and it it's still.

You know it still stays there reasonably well. It's not too shabby at all. so that's the casio. FX 260 Solar - and that gets a big thumbs up.

And also Casio. a big thumbs up for making Ain't an Upgrade to a classic calculator. They've kept it absolutely identical, but they've just improved the display. They've made it faster, it's more higher contrast, it's more tolerant to interruptions in the solar cell, and it's a huge overall improvement.

I Love it. I'm this apart from the white I Mean you know you may not like the white, but apart from that I mean like the keys are alright, they've changed over to the plastic ones, but I think they're just fine. It's an absolute winner. and if you know of a another pocket scientific size calculator like this, let us know.

Yes, there are ones like the Swiss micro is one which emulates the original Hewlett-packard 15c for example. what might have to do a teardown of that one? Thumbs up if you want to tear down the Swiss micros? Mmm. RPN for the European fanboys double-size in Turkey But yeah, I Don't use this as a daily okay I much prefer my Cassio's and it's got end. They didn't upgrade it to that Vpm rubbish.

Visually perfect algebraic method. They kept the original algebraic operating system in this thing. Algebraic traditional algebraic Casio sequence I Love it I Love this thing and for like 9 bucks US G's DS self a favor pick up half a dozen of them thrown around the lab. No worries.

Catch you next time.