Early programmable calculators with RS-232 The Next CEO of Stack OverflowPrice of early color monitor versus TVEarly Apple assemblers, getting hold of themZilog's relationship with MostekWhy were early computers named “Mark”?The almost-was Atari IBM PCWhat was “whole-value computation” in early real-time systems?Instruction set support for multiplication with a constant'Swap file' on early time sharing machinesWhen did computers stop needing to be marketed as calculators?Why did early computer designers eschew integers?

Would a grinding machine be a simple and workable propulsion system for an interplanetary spacecraft?

Calculating discount not working

Simplify trigonometric expression using trigonometric identities

Ising model simulation

How can I separate the number from the unit in argument?

Small nick on power cord from an electric alarm clock, and copper wiring exposed but intact

How to implement Comparable so it is consistent with identity-equality

Could a dragon use its wings to swim?

Why did early computer designers eschew integers?

Direct Implications Between USA and UK in Event of No-Deal Brexit

Is it a bad idea to plug the other end of ESD strap to wall ground?

Finitely generated matrix groups whose eigenvalues are all algebraic

Raspberry pi 3 B with Ubuntu 18.04 server arm64: what pi version

pgfplots: How to draw a tangent graph below two others?

How does a dynamic QR code work?

How seriously should I take size and weight limits of hand luggage?

Cannot restore registry to default in Windows 10?

Strange use of "whether ... than ..." in official text

Why do we say “un seul M” and not “une seule M” even though M is a “consonne”?

Traveling with my 5 year old daughter (as the father) without the mother from Germany to Mexico

Upgrading From a 9 Speed Sora Derailleur?

Is a linearly independent set whose span is dense a Schauder basis?

Compensation for working overtime on Saturdays

My ex-girlfriend uses my Apple ID to login to her iPad, do I have to give her my Apple ID password to reset it?



Early programmable calculators with RS-232



The Next CEO of Stack OverflowPrice of early color monitor versus TVEarly Apple assemblers, getting hold of themZilog's relationship with MostekWhy were early computers named “Mark”?The almost-was Atari IBM PCWhat was “whole-value computation” in early real-time systems?Instruction set support for multiplication with a constant'Swap file' on early time sharing machinesWhen did computers stop needing to be marketed as calculators?Why did early computer designers eschew integers?










1















In the early seventies, companies like HP and Wang sold 'programmable desktop calculators' that were really personal computers in the time before what is usually thought of as the dawn of personal computers.



At the same time, there was a demand for small computers to control lab and factory equipment, and this demand would tend to occur in the same sort of places as would be buying desktop calculators. So it seems likely that people would be wanting to use programmable calculators for equipment control.



The de facto – and indeed de jure – standard interface for computers controlling random equipment was RS-232.



But looking over the specs of the early HP and Wang programmable calculators, I can't find any mention of them having RS-232 ports.



Did any of the early programmable calculators have RS-232 ports? (Or if not, why not?)










share|improve this question


























    1















    In the early seventies, companies like HP and Wang sold 'programmable desktop calculators' that were really personal computers in the time before what is usually thought of as the dawn of personal computers.



    At the same time, there was a demand for small computers to control lab and factory equipment, and this demand would tend to occur in the same sort of places as would be buying desktop calculators. So it seems likely that people would be wanting to use programmable calculators for equipment control.



    The de facto – and indeed de jure – standard interface for computers controlling random equipment was RS-232.



    But looking over the specs of the early HP and Wang programmable calculators, I can't find any mention of them having RS-232 ports.



    Did any of the early programmable calculators have RS-232 ports? (Or if not, why not?)










    share|improve this question
























      1












      1








      1








      In the early seventies, companies like HP and Wang sold 'programmable desktop calculators' that were really personal computers in the time before what is usually thought of as the dawn of personal computers.



      At the same time, there was a demand for small computers to control lab and factory equipment, and this demand would tend to occur in the same sort of places as would be buying desktop calculators. So it seems likely that people would be wanting to use programmable calculators for equipment control.



      The de facto – and indeed de jure – standard interface for computers controlling random equipment was RS-232.



      But looking over the specs of the early HP and Wang programmable calculators, I can't find any mention of them having RS-232 ports.



      Did any of the early programmable calculators have RS-232 ports? (Or if not, why not?)










      share|improve this question














      In the early seventies, companies like HP and Wang sold 'programmable desktop calculators' that were really personal computers in the time before what is usually thought of as the dawn of personal computers.



      At the same time, there was a demand for small computers to control lab and factory equipment, and this demand would tend to occur in the same sort of places as would be buying desktop calculators. So it seems likely that people would be wanting to use programmable calculators for equipment control.



      The de facto – and indeed de jure – standard interface for computers controlling random equipment was RS-232.



      But looking over the specs of the early HP and Wang programmable calculators, I can't find any mention of them having RS-232 ports.



      Did any of the early programmable calculators have RS-232 ports? (Or if not, why not?)







      history rs232 hp calculator wang






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked 5 hours ago









      rwallacerwallace

      10.2k451150




      10.2k451150




















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          3















          The de facto – and indeed de jure – standard interface for computers controlling random equipment was RS-232.




          Some would argue with that, at least in certain industries — Hewlett-Packard’s HPIB (GPIB, IEE-488) was (and is) also commonly used to connect control and/or measurement equipment. It is simpler to implement than RS-232.



          So some early programmable calculators did have external connectivity options, but using HPIB, not RS-232; examples include the HP 9800 series, the HP 80 series, and later calculators using HP-IL and its HPIB adapter. HP-Collection has an extensive selection of photos of HP-IL peripherals.



          RS-232 did appear in calculator-like devices, but they tended to be marketed more as handheld computers — HP’s 94 series for example, and of course Psion’s Organiser II with its CommsLink.






          share|improve this answer






























            2















            In the early seventies, companies like HP and Wang sold 'programmable desktop calculators' that were really personal computers




            Not really, as they stood firmly on the calculator side. If at all, systems like the Cogar 4 and Datapoint 2200 are the origin of desktop computing. Complete units with a CPU, mass storage, CRT display and a full figured typewriter keyboard, all in one unit to be placed on a desk.




            The de facto – and indeed de jure – standard interface for computers controlling random equipment was RS-232.




            Not really. For one is RS232 still a somewhat complicated interface to build (that's the time before integrated ciruits) (*1), but equally important, it lacked standardized protocols and application. If at all, HP's parallel HP-IB (HP-Interface Bus), available since the mid 1960s, ruled the area. It became soon known as GPIB (General Purpose Interface Bus), a term coined by by companies building compatible devices but trying to avoid the HP name as hell. Later standardization in 1975, as IEEE-488, eased the burden.



            Sustainable definition of the HP-IB enabled to not only ease the development of application but it also allowed to operate multiple devices on one interface (*2). A HP-IB enabled computer did only need to have a single interface to control (almost) as many devices as needed, thus enabling to handle a whole setup, not just a single instrument. With a predefined protocol device manufacturer needed only to add application specific data/protocol.



            Serial in contrast is a point to point interface without any protocol support at all. It needs a separate interface for each and every device to be connected, making it quite expensive on the hardware side - not to mention, that there's usually only a finite and rather small number of serial interfaces that can be added to a given computer. On the protocol side applications had to do everything from arbitration and framing to message sequencing and command separation.




            Did any of the early programmable calculators have RS-232 ports? (Or if not, why not?)




            If they where intended to control measuring devices, a GPIB interface was the way to go. Serial was only good for data transmission. So for example many radio applications used it - and of course terminals. Both not necessarily applications for calculators.



            In fact, HP (and many others) even offered serial controllers to be operated via GPIB. Making it easy to extend any device with a GPIB interface to handle many serial connections.



            Serial only became a cheap and popular solution when integrated controllers became available (*3). Even then most of the downside persisted. Still today it's confined to the topic of cheap low level point-to-point connections. The stuff hobbyists prefer as they can replace functionality by investing their time to add hardware hacks and software layers.



            On professional measurement equipment GPIB is still today (2019) the most important interface, even thru many affords are made to replaced the hardware layer by an IP or USB based connection.



            No company in the measurement business could afford to deliver devices without GPIB from the 1970s until today. Just do a search for PCIe based GPIB controllers and you'll be in for a surprise. That market is so big, that many manufacturers crank out ne interface cards whenever there are new desktop systems become available. Similar on the device side.



            Of course all of this happens more on the professional side, where devised easy carry 5 digit price labels, not so much in the sub 1000 USD realm where hobbyists fight for pennies.




            HP reused the GPIB idea even as serial implementaion HP-IL, for their pocket calculators, when they became powerful enough to act as controllers for other devices. Most notably the HP41 series.




            *1 - For a serial interface bit timing timing circuitry, sequencing logic and a shift register is needed for sendin and the same again plus additional word synchronizing on the receiving side. All plus optional parity logic. Quite a lot. A parallel interface in contrast is just a set of two latches (one can even be just a buffer) with clocked input and output enable. Quite less and much more simple hardware.



            *2 - Features that enabled the success of USB half a century as well.



            *3 - Serial interfaces of the 1960s were shoe box sized or larger.






            share|improve this answer

























              Your Answer








              StackExchange.ready(function()
              var channelOptions =
              tags: "".split(" "),
              id: "648"
              ;
              initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

              StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
              // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
              if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
              StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
              createEditor();
              );

              else
              createEditor();

              );

              function createEditor()
              StackExchange.prepareEditor(
              heartbeatType: 'answer',
              autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
              convertImagesToLinks: false,
              noModals: true,
              showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
              reputationToPostImages: null,
              bindNavPrevention: true,
              postfix: "",
              imageUploader:
              brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
              contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
              allowUrls: true
              ,
              noCode: true, onDemand: true,
              discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
              ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
              );



              );













              draft saved

              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function ()
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fretrocomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f9509%2fearly-programmable-calculators-with-rs-232%23new-answer', 'question_page');

              );

              Post as a guest















              Required, but never shown

























              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes








              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes









              3















              The de facto – and indeed de jure – standard interface for computers controlling random equipment was RS-232.




              Some would argue with that, at least in certain industries — Hewlett-Packard’s HPIB (GPIB, IEE-488) was (and is) also commonly used to connect control and/or measurement equipment. It is simpler to implement than RS-232.



              So some early programmable calculators did have external connectivity options, but using HPIB, not RS-232; examples include the HP 9800 series, the HP 80 series, and later calculators using HP-IL and its HPIB adapter. HP-Collection has an extensive selection of photos of HP-IL peripherals.



              RS-232 did appear in calculator-like devices, but they tended to be marketed more as handheld computers — HP’s 94 series for example, and of course Psion’s Organiser II with its CommsLink.






              share|improve this answer



























                3















                The de facto – and indeed de jure – standard interface for computers controlling random equipment was RS-232.




                Some would argue with that, at least in certain industries — Hewlett-Packard’s HPIB (GPIB, IEE-488) was (and is) also commonly used to connect control and/or measurement equipment. It is simpler to implement than RS-232.



                So some early programmable calculators did have external connectivity options, but using HPIB, not RS-232; examples include the HP 9800 series, the HP 80 series, and later calculators using HP-IL and its HPIB adapter. HP-Collection has an extensive selection of photos of HP-IL peripherals.



                RS-232 did appear in calculator-like devices, but they tended to be marketed more as handheld computers — HP’s 94 series for example, and of course Psion’s Organiser II with its CommsLink.






                share|improve this answer

























                  3












                  3








                  3








                  The de facto – and indeed de jure – standard interface for computers controlling random equipment was RS-232.




                  Some would argue with that, at least in certain industries — Hewlett-Packard’s HPIB (GPIB, IEE-488) was (and is) also commonly used to connect control and/or measurement equipment. It is simpler to implement than RS-232.



                  So some early programmable calculators did have external connectivity options, but using HPIB, not RS-232; examples include the HP 9800 series, the HP 80 series, and later calculators using HP-IL and its HPIB adapter. HP-Collection has an extensive selection of photos of HP-IL peripherals.



                  RS-232 did appear in calculator-like devices, but they tended to be marketed more as handheld computers — HP’s 94 series for example, and of course Psion’s Organiser II with its CommsLink.






                  share|improve this answer














                  The de facto – and indeed de jure – standard interface for computers controlling random equipment was RS-232.




                  Some would argue with that, at least in certain industries — Hewlett-Packard’s HPIB (GPIB, IEE-488) was (and is) also commonly used to connect control and/or measurement equipment. It is simpler to implement than RS-232.



                  So some early programmable calculators did have external connectivity options, but using HPIB, not RS-232; examples include the HP 9800 series, the HP 80 series, and later calculators using HP-IL and its HPIB adapter. HP-Collection has an extensive selection of photos of HP-IL peripherals.



                  RS-232 did appear in calculator-like devices, but they tended to be marketed more as handheld computers — HP’s 94 series for example, and of course Psion’s Organiser II with its CommsLink.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 4 hours ago









                  Stephen KittStephen Kitt

                  38.9k8159169




                  38.9k8159169





















                      2















                      In the early seventies, companies like HP and Wang sold 'programmable desktop calculators' that were really personal computers




                      Not really, as they stood firmly on the calculator side. If at all, systems like the Cogar 4 and Datapoint 2200 are the origin of desktop computing. Complete units with a CPU, mass storage, CRT display and a full figured typewriter keyboard, all in one unit to be placed on a desk.




                      The de facto – and indeed de jure – standard interface for computers controlling random equipment was RS-232.




                      Not really. For one is RS232 still a somewhat complicated interface to build (that's the time before integrated ciruits) (*1), but equally important, it lacked standardized protocols and application. If at all, HP's parallel HP-IB (HP-Interface Bus), available since the mid 1960s, ruled the area. It became soon known as GPIB (General Purpose Interface Bus), a term coined by by companies building compatible devices but trying to avoid the HP name as hell. Later standardization in 1975, as IEEE-488, eased the burden.



                      Sustainable definition of the HP-IB enabled to not only ease the development of application but it also allowed to operate multiple devices on one interface (*2). A HP-IB enabled computer did only need to have a single interface to control (almost) as many devices as needed, thus enabling to handle a whole setup, not just a single instrument. With a predefined protocol device manufacturer needed only to add application specific data/protocol.



                      Serial in contrast is a point to point interface without any protocol support at all. It needs a separate interface for each and every device to be connected, making it quite expensive on the hardware side - not to mention, that there's usually only a finite and rather small number of serial interfaces that can be added to a given computer. On the protocol side applications had to do everything from arbitration and framing to message sequencing and command separation.




                      Did any of the early programmable calculators have RS-232 ports? (Or if not, why not?)




                      If they where intended to control measuring devices, a GPIB interface was the way to go. Serial was only good for data transmission. So for example many radio applications used it - and of course terminals. Both not necessarily applications for calculators.



                      In fact, HP (and many others) even offered serial controllers to be operated via GPIB. Making it easy to extend any device with a GPIB interface to handle many serial connections.



                      Serial only became a cheap and popular solution when integrated controllers became available (*3). Even then most of the downside persisted. Still today it's confined to the topic of cheap low level point-to-point connections. The stuff hobbyists prefer as they can replace functionality by investing their time to add hardware hacks and software layers.



                      On professional measurement equipment GPIB is still today (2019) the most important interface, even thru many affords are made to replaced the hardware layer by an IP or USB based connection.



                      No company in the measurement business could afford to deliver devices without GPIB from the 1970s until today. Just do a search for PCIe based GPIB controllers and you'll be in for a surprise. That market is so big, that many manufacturers crank out ne interface cards whenever there are new desktop systems become available. Similar on the device side.



                      Of course all of this happens more on the professional side, where devised easy carry 5 digit price labels, not so much in the sub 1000 USD realm where hobbyists fight for pennies.




                      HP reused the GPIB idea even as serial implementaion HP-IL, for their pocket calculators, when they became powerful enough to act as controllers for other devices. Most notably the HP41 series.




                      *1 - For a serial interface bit timing timing circuitry, sequencing logic and a shift register is needed for sendin and the same again plus additional word synchronizing on the receiving side. All plus optional parity logic. Quite a lot. A parallel interface in contrast is just a set of two latches (one can even be just a buffer) with clocked input and output enable. Quite less and much more simple hardware.



                      *2 - Features that enabled the success of USB half a century as well.



                      *3 - Serial interfaces of the 1960s were shoe box sized or larger.






                      share|improve this answer





























                        2















                        In the early seventies, companies like HP and Wang sold 'programmable desktop calculators' that were really personal computers




                        Not really, as they stood firmly on the calculator side. If at all, systems like the Cogar 4 and Datapoint 2200 are the origin of desktop computing. Complete units with a CPU, mass storage, CRT display and a full figured typewriter keyboard, all in one unit to be placed on a desk.




                        The de facto – and indeed de jure – standard interface for computers controlling random equipment was RS-232.




                        Not really. For one is RS232 still a somewhat complicated interface to build (that's the time before integrated ciruits) (*1), but equally important, it lacked standardized protocols and application. If at all, HP's parallel HP-IB (HP-Interface Bus), available since the mid 1960s, ruled the area. It became soon known as GPIB (General Purpose Interface Bus), a term coined by by companies building compatible devices but trying to avoid the HP name as hell. Later standardization in 1975, as IEEE-488, eased the burden.



                        Sustainable definition of the HP-IB enabled to not only ease the development of application but it also allowed to operate multiple devices on one interface (*2). A HP-IB enabled computer did only need to have a single interface to control (almost) as many devices as needed, thus enabling to handle a whole setup, not just a single instrument. With a predefined protocol device manufacturer needed only to add application specific data/protocol.



                        Serial in contrast is a point to point interface without any protocol support at all. It needs a separate interface for each and every device to be connected, making it quite expensive on the hardware side - not to mention, that there's usually only a finite and rather small number of serial interfaces that can be added to a given computer. On the protocol side applications had to do everything from arbitration and framing to message sequencing and command separation.




                        Did any of the early programmable calculators have RS-232 ports? (Or if not, why not?)




                        If they where intended to control measuring devices, a GPIB interface was the way to go. Serial was only good for data transmission. So for example many radio applications used it - and of course terminals. Both not necessarily applications for calculators.



                        In fact, HP (and many others) even offered serial controllers to be operated via GPIB. Making it easy to extend any device with a GPIB interface to handle many serial connections.



                        Serial only became a cheap and popular solution when integrated controllers became available (*3). Even then most of the downside persisted. Still today it's confined to the topic of cheap low level point-to-point connections. The stuff hobbyists prefer as they can replace functionality by investing their time to add hardware hacks and software layers.



                        On professional measurement equipment GPIB is still today (2019) the most important interface, even thru many affords are made to replaced the hardware layer by an IP or USB based connection.



                        No company in the measurement business could afford to deliver devices without GPIB from the 1970s until today. Just do a search for PCIe based GPIB controllers and you'll be in for a surprise. That market is so big, that many manufacturers crank out ne interface cards whenever there are new desktop systems become available. Similar on the device side.



                        Of course all of this happens more on the professional side, where devised easy carry 5 digit price labels, not so much in the sub 1000 USD realm where hobbyists fight for pennies.




                        HP reused the GPIB idea even as serial implementaion HP-IL, for their pocket calculators, when they became powerful enough to act as controllers for other devices. Most notably the HP41 series.




                        *1 - For a serial interface bit timing timing circuitry, sequencing logic and a shift register is needed for sendin and the same again plus additional word synchronizing on the receiving side. All plus optional parity logic. Quite a lot. A parallel interface in contrast is just a set of two latches (one can even be just a buffer) with clocked input and output enable. Quite less and much more simple hardware.



                        *2 - Features that enabled the success of USB half a century as well.



                        *3 - Serial interfaces of the 1960s were shoe box sized or larger.






                        share|improve this answer



























                          2












                          2








                          2








                          In the early seventies, companies like HP and Wang sold 'programmable desktop calculators' that were really personal computers




                          Not really, as they stood firmly on the calculator side. If at all, systems like the Cogar 4 and Datapoint 2200 are the origin of desktop computing. Complete units with a CPU, mass storage, CRT display and a full figured typewriter keyboard, all in one unit to be placed on a desk.




                          The de facto – and indeed de jure – standard interface for computers controlling random equipment was RS-232.




                          Not really. For one is RS232 still a somewhat complicated interface to build (that's the time before integrated ciruits) (*1), but equally important, it lacked standardized protocols and application. If at all, HP's parallel HP-IB (HP-Interface Bus), available since the mid 1960s, ruled the area. It became soon known as GPIB (General Purpose Interface Bus), a term coined by by companies building compatible devices but trying to avoid the HP name as hell. Later standardization in 1975, as IEEE-488, eased the burden.



                          Sustainable definition of the HP-IB enabled to not only ease the development of application but it also allowed to operate multiple devices on one interface (*2). A HP-IB enabled computer did only need to have a single interface to control (almost) as many devices as needed, thus enabling to handle a whole setup, not just a single instrument. With a predefined protocol device manufacturer needed only to add application specific data/protocol.



                          Serial in contrast is a point to point interface without any protocol support at all. It needs a separate interface for each and every device to be connected, making it quite expensive on the hardware side - not to mention, that there's usually only a finite and rather small number of serial interfaces that can be added to a given computer. On the protocol side applications had to do everything from arbitration and framing to message sequencing and command separation.




                          Did any of the early programmable calculators have RS-232 ports? (Or if not, why not?)




                          If they where intended to control measuring devices, a GPIB interface was the way to go. Serial was only good for data transmission. So for example many radio applications used it - and of course terminals. Both not necessarily applications for calculators.



                          In fact, HP (and many others) even offered serial controllers to be operated via GPIB. Making it easy to extend any device with a GPIB interface to handle many serial connections.



                          Serial only became a cheap and popular solution when integrated controllers became available (*3). Even then most of the downside persisted. Still today it's confined to the topic of cheap low level point-to-point connections. The stuff hobbyists prefer as they can replace functionality by investing their time to add hardware hacks and software layers.



                          On professional measurement equipment GPIB is still today (2019) the most important interface, even thru many affords are made to replaced the hardware layer by an IP or USB based connection.



                          No company in the measurement business could afford to deliver devices without GPIB from the 1970s until today. Just do a search for PCIe based GPIB controllers and you'll be in for a surprise. That market is so big, that many manufacturers crank out ne interface cards whenever there are new desktop systems become available. Similar on the device side.



                          Of course all of this happens more on the professional side, where devised easy carry 5 digit price labels, not so much in the sub 1000 USD realm where hobbyists fight for pennies.




                          HP reused the GPIB idea even as serial implementaion HP-IL, for their pocket calculators, when they became powerful enough to act as controllers for other devices. Most notably the HP41 series.




                          *1 - For a serial interface bit timing timing circuitry, sequencing logic and a shift register is needed for sendin and the same again plus additional word synchronizing on the receiving side. All plus optional parity logic. Quite a lot. A parallel interface in contrast is just a set of two latches (one can even be just a buffer) with clocked input and output enable. Quite less and much more simple hardware.



                          *2 - Features that enabled the success of USB half a century as well.



                          *3 - Serial interfaces of the 1960s were shoe box sized or larger.






                          share|improve this answer
















                          In the early seventies, companies like HP and Wang sold 'programmable desktop calculators' that were really personal computers




                          Not really, as they stood firmly on the calculator side. If at all, systems like the Cogar 4 and Datapoint 2200 are the origin of desktop computing. Complete units with a CPU, mass storage, CRT display and a full figured typewriter keyboard, all in one unit to be placed on a desk.




                          The de facto – and indeed de jure – standard interface for computers controlling random equipment was RS-232.




                          Not really. For one is RS232 still a somewhat complicated interface to build (that's the time before integrated ciruits) (*1), but equally important, it lacked standardized protocols and application. If at all, HP's parallel HP-IB (HP-Interface Bus), available since the mid 1960s, ruled the area. It became soon known as GPIB (General Purpose Interface Bus), a term coined by by companies building compatible devices but trying to avoid the HP name as hell. Later standardization in 1975, as IEEE-488, eased the burden.



                          Sustainable definition of the HP-IB enabled to not only ease the development of application but it also allowed to operate multiple devices on one interface (*2). A HP-IB enabled computer did only need to have a single interface to control (almost) as many devices as needed, thus enabling to handle a whole setup, not just a single instrument. With a predefined protocol device manufacturer needed only to add application specific data/protocol.



                          Serial in contrast is a point to point interface without any protocol support at all. It needs a separate interface for each and every device to be connected, making it quite expensive on the hardware side - not to mention, that there's usually only a finite and rather small number of serial interfaces that can be added to a given computer. On the protocol side applications had to do everything from arbitration and framing to message sequencing and command separation.




                          Did any of the early programmable calculators have RS-232 ports? (Or if not, why not?)




                          If they where intended to control measuring devices, a GPIB interface was the way to go. Serial was only good for data transmission. So for example many radio applications used it - and of course terminals. Both not necessarily applications for calculators.



                          In fact, HP (and many others) even offered serial controllers to be operated via GPIB. Making it easy to extend any device with a GPIB interface to handle many serial connections.



                          Serial only became a cheap and popular solution when integrated controllers became available (*3). Even then most of the downside persisted. Still today it's confined to the topic of cheap low level point-to-point connections. The stuff hobbyists prefer as they can replace functionality by investing their time to add hardware hacks and software layers.



                          On professional measurement equipment GPIB is still today (2019) the most important interface, even thru many affords are made to replaced the hardware layer by an IP or USB based connection.



                          No company in the measurement business could afford to deliver devices without GPIB from the 1970s until today. Just do a search for PCIe based GPIB controllers and you'll be in for a surprise. That market is so big, that many manufacturers crank out ne interface cards whenever there are new desktop systems become available. Similar on the device side.



                          Of course all of this happens more on the professional side, where devised easy carry 5 digit price labels, not so much in the sub 1000 USD realm where hobbyists fight for pennies.




                          HP reused the GPIB idea even as serial implementaion HP-IL, for their pocket calculators, when they became powerful enough to act as controllers for other devices. Most notably the HP41 series.




                          *1 - For a serial interface bit timing timing circuitry, sequencing logic and a shift register is needed for sendin and the same again plus additional word synchronizing on the receiving side. All plus optional parity logic. Quite a lot. A parallel interface in contrast is just a set of two latches (one can even be just a buffer) with clocked input and output enable. Quite less and much more simple hardware.



                          *2 - Features that enabled the success of USB half a century as well.



                          *3 - Serial interfaces of the 1960s were shoe box sized or larger.







                          share|improve this answer














                          share|improve this answer



                          share|improve this answer








                          edited 2 hours ago

























                          answered 4 hours ago









                          RaffzahnRaffzahn

                          54.5k6135221




                          54.5k6135221



























                              draft saved

                              draft discarded
















































                              Thanks for contributing an answer to Retrocomputing Stack Exchange!


                              • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                              But avoid


                              • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                              • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                              To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function ()
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fretrocomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f9509%2fearly-programmable-calculators-with-rs-232%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                              );

                              Post as a guest















                              Required, but never shown





















































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown

































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown







                              Popular posts from this blog

                              Log på Navigationsmenu

                              Creating second map without labels using QGIS?How to lock map labels for inset map in Print Composer?How to Force the Showing of Labels of a Vector File in QGISQGIS Valmiera, Labels only show for part of polygonsRemoving duplicate point labels in QGISLabeling every feature using QGIS?Show labels for point features outside map canvasAbbreviate Road Labels in QGIS only when requiredExporting map from composer in QGIS - text labels have moved in output?How to make sure labels in qgis turn up in layout map?Writing label expression with ArcMap and If then Statement?

                              Nuuk Indholdsfortegnelse Etyomologi | Historie | Geografi | Transport og infrastruktur | Politik og administration | Uddannelsesinstitutioner | Kultur | Venskabsbyer | Noter | Eksterne henvisninger | Se også | Navigationsmenuwww.sermersooq.gl64°10′N 51°45′V / 64.167°N 51.750°V / 64.167; -51.75064°10′N 51°45′V / 64.167°N 51.750°V / 64.167; -51.750DMI - KlimanormalerSalmonsen, s. 850Grønlands Naturinstitut undersøger rensdyr i Akia og Maniitsoq foråret 2008Grønlands NaturinstitutNy vej til Qinngorput indviet i dagAntallet af biler i Nuuk må begrænsesNy taxacentral mødt med demonstrationKøreplan. Rute 1, 2 og 3SnescootersporNuukNord er for storSkoler i Kommuneqarfik SermersooqAtuarfik Samuel KleinschmidtKangillinguit AtuarfiatNuussuup AtuarfiaNuuk Internationale FriskoleIlinniarfissuaq, Grønlands SeminariumLedelseÅrsberetning for 2008Kunst og arkitekturÅrsberetning for 2008Julie om naturenNuuk KunstmuseumSilamiutGrønlands Nationalmuseum og ArkivStatistisk ÅrbogGrønlands LandsbibliotekStore koncerter på stribeVandhund nummer 1.000.000Kommuneqarfik Sermersooq – MalikForsidenVenskabsbyerLyngby-Taarbæk i GrønlandArctic Business NetworkWinter Cities 2008 i NuukDagligt opdaterede satellitbilleder fra NuukområdetKommuneqarfik Sermersooqs hjemmesideTurist i NuukGrønlands Statistiks databankGrønlands Hjemmestyres valgresultaterrrWorldCat124325457671310-5