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?

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

Salesforce opportunity stages

Is the offspring between a demon and a celestial possible? If so what is it called and is it in a book somewhere?

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

Calculating discount not working

Can this transistor (2n2222) take 6V on emitter-base? Am I reading datasheet incorrectly?

Early programmable calculators with RS-232

Shortening a title without changing its meaning

Incomplete cube

Finitely generated matrix groups whose eigenvalues are all algebraic

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

How do I keep Mac Emacs from trapping M-`?

My boss doesn't want me to have a side project

Does Germany produce more waste than the US?

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

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

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

Do I need to write [sic] when including a quotation with a number less than 10 that isn't written out?

Why doesn't Shulchan Aruch include the laws of destroying fruit trees?

Why did the Drakh emissary look so blurred in S04:E11 "Lines of Communication"?

Compensation for working overtime on Saturdays

Man transported from Alternate World into ours by a Neutrino Detector

The sum of any ten consecutive numbers from a fibonacci sequence is divisible by 11

Does the Idaho Potato Commission associate potato skins with healthy eating?



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

                              Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

                              Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

                              Tom Holland Mục lục Đầu đời và giáo dục | Sự nghiệp | Cuộc sống cá nhân | Phim tham gia | Giải thưởng và đề cử | Chú thích | Liên kết ngoài | Trình đơn chuyển hướngProfile“Person Details for Thomas Stanley Holland, "England and Wales Birth Registration Index, 1837-2008" — FamilySearch.org”"Meet Tom Holland... the 16-year-old star of The Impossible""Schoolboy actor Tom Holland finds himself in Oscar contention for role in tsunami drama"“Naomi Watts on the Prince William and Harry's reaction to her film about the late Princess Diana”lưu trữ"Holland and Pflueger Are West End's Two New 'Billy Elliots'""I'm so envious of my son, the movie star! British writer Dominic Holland's spent 20 years trying to crack Hollywood - but he's been beaten to it by a very unlikely rival"“Richard and Margaret Povey of Jersey, Channel Islands, UK: Information about Thomas Stanley Holland”"Tom Holland to play Billy Elliot""New Billy Elliot leaving the garage"Billy Elliot the Musical - Tom Holland - Billy"A Tale of four Billys: Tom Holland""The Feel Good Factor""Thames Christian College schoolboys join Myleene Klass for The Feelgood Factor""Government launches £600,000 arts bursaries pilot""BILLY's Chapman, Holland, Gardner & Jackson-Keen Visit Prime Minister""Elton John 'blown away' by Billy Elliot fifth birthday" (video with John's interview and fragments of Holland's performance)"First News interviews Arrietty's Tom Holland"“33rd Critics' Circle Film Awards winners”“National Board of Review Current Awards”Bản gốc"Ron Howard Whaling Tale 'In The Heart Of The Sea' Casts Tom Holland"“'Spider-Man' Finds Tom Holland to Star as New Web-Slinger”lưu trữ“Captain America: Civil War (2016)”“Film Review: ‘Captain America: Civil War’”lưu trữ“‘Captain America: Civil War’ review: Choose your own avenger”lưu trữ“The Lost City of Z reviews”“Sony Pictures and Marvel Studios Find Their 'Spider-Man' Star and Director”“‘Mary Magdalene’, ‘Current War’ & ‘Wind River’ Get 2017 Release Dates From Weinstein”“Lionsgate Unleashing Daisy Ridley & Tom Holland Starrer ‘Chaos Walking’ In Cannes”“PTA's 'Master' Leads Chicago Film Critics Nominations, UPDATED: Houston and Indiana Critics Nominations”“Nominaciones Goya 2013 Telecinco Cinema – ENG”“Jameson Empire Film Awards: Martin Freeman wins best actor for performance in The Hobbit”“34th Annual Young Artist Awards”Bản gốc“Teen Choice Awards 2016—Captain America: Civil War Leads Second Wave of Nominations”“BAFTA Film Award Nominations: ‘La La Land’ Leads Race”“Saturn Awards Nominations 2017: 'Rogue One,' 'Walking Dead' Lead”Tom HollandTom HollandTom HollandTom Hollandmedia.gettyimages.comWorldCat Identities300279794no20130442900000 0004 0355 42791085670554170004732cb16706349t(data)XX5557367