Customer reviews from hp.com
HP - 35S Scientific Calculator
Average customer rating
4.3
(60 Reviews)
Rating breakdown 60 reviews
5 Stars
36
4 Stars
13
3 Stars
4
2 Stars
4
1 Star
3
82%of customers recommend this product.
(
49 out of
60)
Customer Reviews for HP - 35S Scientific Calculator
Customer Rating
4
35S ??????
on April 7, 2008
Posted by: brnrdmchd
Gender:Male
I proudly own several hp calculators from 33E, 32S II, 41xx, 48g+,49g, and 50g. When the 35S came out as an update to 32S II with its portability and boasting of Complex Number operation I search many store to avail myself of this little wonder of a calculator, only to discover that the 35S cannot find the square root of a negative number. It displays SQRT(NEG) instead of (0 i 5.9161) for sqrt(-35). If I'm in error please forgive me and let me know.
Apart from the above comment it's a great calculator, terrific display.
The key press is smooth and effortless unlike the 49g lets say, but more like the 41 series.
Apart from the above comment it's a great calculator, terrific display.
The key press is smooth and effortless unlike the 49g lets say, but more like the 41 series.
No, I would not recommend this to a friend.
Features
3
Performance
4
Written by a customer while visiting hp.com
Customer Rating
4
Good but some features awkward
on July 15, 2008
Posted by: flohpuser
Gender:Male
I really like this calculator. The programmable features and overall features are good. There are 3 things that are very clumsy for me.
I do technical drafting in the construction industry. I use triangulation a lot. Therefore I use the polar coordinate feature a lot.
This gives me, with two sides, the hypotenuse and the angle which is less than or equal to 45 degrees. On all of the older models of calculators this feature worked with very few key strokes and you could use numbers in the stack or in memory with it. Now it requires many more keystrokes to extrapolate the desired results and can only be done with direct entry.
2nd, the execute program requires at least one more keystroke than before.
3rd the store key requires a prefix key.
Unfortunately, for me, these are 3 features that I use all the time.
I much preferred the HP32SII for these features.
I really like the keypad and design of this calculator except as shown above.
I did not like the HP33s keypad and layout. The keys wore out
too quickly and were not comfortable to the hand. I could not trust my keyed in entries on the HP33s.
I do technical drafting in the construction industry. I use triangulation a lot. Therefore I use the polar coordinate feature a lot.
This gives me, with two sides, the hypotenuse and the angle which is less than or equal to 45 degrees. On all of the older models of calculators this feature worked with very few key strokes and you could use numbers in the stack or in memory with it. Now it requires many more keystrokes to extrapolate the desired results and can only be done with direct entry.
2nd, the execute program requires at least one more keystroke than before.
3rd the store key requires a prefix key.
Unfortunately, for me, these are 3 features that I use all the time.
I much preferred the HP32SII for these features.
I really like the keypad and design of this calculator except as shown above.
I did not like the HP33s keypad and layout. The keys wore out
too quickly and were not comfortable to the hand. I could not trust my keyed in entries on the HP33s.
I would recommend this to a friend!
Features
3
Performance
4
Written by a customer while visiting hp.com
Customer Rating
4
Wanted book
on April 8, 2009
Posted by: RPNlvr
Gender:Male
This HP 35s is a fine programmable calculator but how can I learn to use it? With great difficulty. It comes with a VERY skimpy instruction book (a flyer) barely 24 pages or so and is double spaced! HP had no trouble using small print single spaced for the warranty info in the back, but the booklet was almost a joke. I don't have easy access to the web or a home computer (to use the included CD instructions), so I took off two stars for "features" because I think a thorough and comprehensive book is absolutely a must, and is missing here. Now I have to go to the library and find it on-line and do what I can in the library's time limit. This is why I gave 4 stars in the overall rating as well. I gave performance 4 because I don't think it has alphanumeric entry like my old 41CX. It only takes in single letters at a time, not words. I know the on-line instructions is the way of the world now, and other calcs like TI are doing the same thing, but that is lame. They could have used small or very small print and gotten quite a lot in a book, and I would have been much happier. Also, it is incorrect that it comes with a hard case. It comes with a soft case that is stiff, but flexible.
The 35s itself is a very impressive machine and it's the best looking calculator I've ever seen. It's a very capable scientific calc, and overall I'm very happy with it.
Now let me get off cause I have other things to do at this library computer.
The 35s itself is a very impressive machine and it's the best looking calculator I've ever seen. It's a very capable scientific calc, and overall I'm very happy with it.
Now let me get off cause I have other things to do at this library computer.
I would recommend this to a friend!
Features
3
Performance
4
Written by a customer while visiting hp.com
Customer Rating
5
Top Notch product
on July 10, 2009
Posted by: gwapoguy
Gender:Male
I have had an HP35, 41, 32sII and now the 35s. They all are great calculators and I was really happy to see that HP maintained its reputation for solid quality with the 35s.
I still have my 32s and this 35s has the same solid feel as the 32. The function keys have been relocated but so far this has not bothered me. It has the right mix of functions for my use. I do most of my heavy calculating work with mathcad but I always have the hp on the desk for those quick number cruches that one has to deal with.
Although the 35s is slightly larger than the 32sII,it still fits in my shirt pocket and I like that!
The one thing I don't like is that on the 35s the "STO, LN, and e^x" keys are now shifted keys. These I use often and I wish HP had left them as they were in the 32sII.
I still have my 32s and this 35s has the same solid feel as the 32. The function keys have been relocated but so far this has not bothered me. It has the right mix of functions for my use. I do most of my heavy calculating work with mathcad but I always have the hp on the desk for those quick number cruches that one has to deal with.
Although the 35s is slightly larger than the 32sII,it still fits in my shirt pocket and I like that!
The one thing I don't like is that on the 35s the "STO, LN, and e^x" keys are now shifted keys. These I use often and I wish HP had left them as they were in the 32sII.
I would recommend this to a friend!
Features
5
Performance
5
Written by a customer while visiting hp.com
Customer Rating
4
Worthy of it's namesake
on July 28, 2009
Posted by: AeroDoug
Gender:Male
28-July-2009
Having purchased a new HP-35s several months ago, I can now express my
opinions on it.
opinions on it.
First of all, I am a long-time user of HP calculators, starting with the
original HP-35, which purchased in my college days for the unheard-of price
of $395!! When the HP-35 died (batteries went defunct) about 10 years.
later I purchased an HP-25S (I think), but it somehow disappeared a few
years later. Maybe the shock of the loss has dimmed my memory!!
original HP-35, which purchased in my college days for the unheard-of price
of $395!! When the HP-35 died (batteries went defunct) about 10 years.
later I purchased an HP-25S (I think), but it somehow disappeared a few
years later. Maybe the shock of the loss has dimmed my memory!!
My RPN calculator prior to the HP-35s was an HP-32s, which I still own, and
which is perfectly functional. I puchased the HP-35s primarily for
nostalgic reasons, as the 35th anniversary of the orignal HP-35 was too
much to pass up. In other words, I really didn't NEED a new HP calculator.
which is perfectly functional. I puchased the HP-35s primarily for
nostalgic reasons, as the 35th anniversary of the orignal HP-35 was too
much to pass up. In other words, I really didn't NEED a new HP calculator.
I noted several pleasant surprises with the HP-35s. First was the great
visibility of the display. It probably isn't really bigger than that of
the HP-32s, but it somehow LOOKS bigger. And having two line of display
is a major plus. The classic HP-35 case angle is also a big plus
visibility of the display. It probably isn't really bigger than that of
the HP-32s, but it somehow LOOKS bigger. And having two line of display
is a major plus. The classic HP-35 case angle is also a big plus
The second feature was the solid keyboard feel, which wasn't really a
surprise, as none of the competitors' keyboards have ever been comparable
to HP. I know that some of the 2nd-generation HP's, along with some of
the most modern low-cost HP's have had marginal keyboard reviews, but I
suspect that HP wisely chose to make sure that the HP-35 name was not
maligned by a successor with a cheap keyboard.
surprise, as none of the competitors' keyboards have ever been comparable
to HP. I know that some of the 2nd-generation HP's, along with some of
the most modern low-cost HP's have had marginal keyboard reviews, but I
suspect that HP wisely chose to make sure that the HP-35 name was not
maligned by a successor with a cheap keyboard.
Just as an aside, I observed the introduction of the HP-33 some years ago,
and was completely turned off by it's "retro" look and by the fact that it
was, by default, an algebraic mode calculator. It is my contention that a
calculator that is RPN as a secondary mode will not have its key placement
optimized for RPN use. I thus had considered the HP-33 not worth the
bother in algebraic mode, as I am firmly in the RPN camp. Conversely, I
also consider the algebraic mode of the HP-35s to be of litle use.
and was completely turned off by it's "retro" look and by the fact that it
was, by default, an algebraic mode calculator. It is my contention that a
calculator that is RPN as a secondary mode will not have its key placement
optimized for RPN use. I thus had considered the HP-33 not worth the
bother in algebraic mode, as I am firmly in the RPN camp. Conversely, I
also consider the algebraic mode of the HP-35s to be of litle use.
The programmability of the HP-35s tops all other HP's I have owned, though
admittedly I have not owned the whole stable of HP's line of programmables.
I have already written some useful library functions, the game of Yatze,
and a program to check the statistical distribution of the RANDOM function
in the calculator. Some of these programs were undertaked as learning
exercises for exploring the HP-35s programming capabilities.
admittedly I have not owned the whole stable of HP's line of programmables.
I have already written some useful library functions, the game of Yatze,
and a program to check the statistical distribution of the RANDOM function
in the calculator. Some of these programs were undertaked as learning
exercises for exploring the HP-35s programming capabilities.
The inability to STORE HP-35s programs off-line is annoying. But so is
the price tag that goes with that capability. My perspective is that a
calculator is a calculator, and a computer is a computer. If I need a
computer, I'll use a computer! Writing relatively short programs for
solving repetitive computations is easier on the HP-35s that writing
comparable programs on a destop computer. As such, the HP-35s fills a
useful niche.
the price tag that goes with that capability. My perspective is that a
calculator is a calculator, and a computer is a computer. If I need a
computer, I'll use a computer! Writing relatively short programs for
solving repetitive computations is easier on the HP-35s that writing
comparable programs on a destop computer. As such, the HP-35s fills a
useful niche.
I think the choice of batteries (2 x CR2032) was a fine choice. Two
of these batteries provides 6 volts; it takes four alkaline batteries
to generate the save voltage. In my opinion, anyone who runs the pair
of CR2032's into the ground in less than 6 months, as one reviewer had,
should be using a real computer for such intensive computations.
of these batteries provides 6 volts; it takes four alkaline batteries
to generate the save voltage. In my opinion, anyone who runs the pair
of CR2032's into the ground in less than 6 months, as one reviewer had,
should be using a real computer for such intensive computations.
I would also like to comment on a number of complaints raised in HP-35s
reviews regarding the lack of polar-to-rectangular and rectangular-to-polar
conversions on the HP-35s. I have surmised that these conversions, which
were included in the HP-33, as well as in my HP-32s, were not dropped on
the HP-35s without reason. And I suspect that the reason was two-fold:
reviews regarding the lack of polar-to-rectangular and rectangular-to-polar
conversions on the HP-35s. I have surmised that these conversions, which
were included in the HP-33, as well as in my HP-32s, were not dropped on
the HP-35s without reason. And I suspect that the reason was two-fold:
a) you may have run out of internal ROM in the 8502 processor;
b) the ability to directly manipulated complex and polar coordinate data
types rendered the polar <-> rectangular conversions redundant.
types rendered the polar <-> rectangular conversions redundant.
In implimenting a rich set of complex and polar coordinate data functions,
it became possible to remove the explicit conversions. It seems like a
reasonable trade-off to me. I have obtained the polar <-> rectangular
conversion program through the HP web-site after writing one for myself
from scratch. I haven't even figured out how the HP program actually
works yet, but I suspect that when I more fully understand the HP-35s
EQN capability, it will become clearer.
it became possible to remove the explicit conversions. It seems like a
reasonable trade-off to me. I have obtained the polar <-> rectangular
conversion program through the HP web-site after writing one for myself
from scratch. I haven't even figured out how the HP program actually
works yet, but I suspect that when I more fully understand the HP-35s
EQN capability, it will become clearer.
The HP-35s possesses features far beyond the original "HP-35", for a
fraction of he price, and is solidly built. I would have to think long
and hard about what I would do differently in a follow-on "HP-35s/II".
Perhaps a cell-phone style SIMM card for storing programs?
fraction of he price, and is solidly built. I would have to think long
and hard about what I would do differently in a follow-on "HP-35s/II".
Perhaps a cell-phone style SIMM card for storing programs?
In summary, the HP-35s is deemed worthy of its namesake.
I would recommend this to a friend!
Features
5
Performance
5
Written by a customer while visiting hp.com
Customer Rating
5
this is it for RPN
on August 26, 2011
Posted by: esse
from here
I bought several of these in case they stop making them or at least
calculators like these. The 35s has a classic feel to it, and more features
than I'll ever need. Two lines of stack display is nice to have compared to
classic HP. The zipper clamshell is a nicer case to have; these came
with a sleeve type case from which you must fully remove the unit to use.
Battery life just OK. Top edge of the screen (some tiny icons there)
can be hard to see without good light at just the right angle. But I
don't think there's a better calculator, and for RPN I think it's the only game
in town (aside from the 33S which has a casio look to it, and a couple
of expensive HP graphing calculators).
calculators like these. The 35s has a classic feel to it, and more features
than I'll ever need. Two lines of stack display is nice to have compared to
classic HP. The zipper clamshell is a nicer case to have; these came
with a sleeve type case from which you must fully remove the unit to use.
Battery life just OK. Top edge of the screen (some tiny icons there)
can be hard to see without good light at just the right angle. But I
don't think there's a better calculator, and for RPN I think it's the only game
in town (aside from the 33S which has a casio look to it, and a couple
of expensive HP graphing calculators).
I would recommend this to a friend!
Features
5
Performance
5
Written by a customer while visiting hp.com
Customer Rating
5
HP Classic Calculator
on August 28, 2011
Posted by: MichaelStrucEng
from Appleton, WI
Gender:Male
HP continues to make great calculators like they have for many years. This one works just like my first HP41 CV I bought in 1983. I was sold on HP products then and this New HP reinforces that satisfaction....Thanks and keep making great products.
I would recommend this to a friend!
Features
5
Performance
5
Written by a customer while visiting hp.com
Customer Rating
5
One of the Top Three of all time
on September 27, 2011
Posted by: Ninja12
from Kansas City
Gender:Male
I enjoyed my HP 41 CV, the HP-28S, and now the HP 35S. My 28S was stolen, so I needed something new. I still use the 41CV, but it is getting old and tired. So far, I love the 35S and it is not as near as complicated or cumbersome as the 50g.
I would recommend this to a friend!
Features
5
Performance
4
Written by a customer while visiting hp.com