Guest sbsdegb1 Posted February 19, 2003 Report Posted February 19, 2003 Why is Calculator so shite on this phone. Why can't we have a fancy one like on other Windows CE devices. Or was it bunged on as an after thought.
Guest spacemonkey Posted February 19, 2003 Report Posted February 19, 2003 I think it was aiming at being a cheap quick and easy calculator like you'll find on other phones. The reason most Win CE calculators look quite nice is they are designed for stylus input, the main problem with the SPV calculator for me is I can never remember which direction is which action (+,-,*,/)
Guest HelloDave Posted February 19, 2003 Report Posted February 19, 2003 Why is Calculator so shite on this phone. It's not alone - look at Media Player :) I am trying to write a half decent calculator app at the moment, but i'm trying to learn Win CE programming at the same time, so it could take a while!
Guest sbsdegb1 Posted February 19, 2003 Report Posted February 19, 2003 I would attempt to write one myself but have had problems trying to unlock my phone (remove certification)... Tried methods everyone says but to no avail. Also learn't that Orange backup doesn't actually backup lots of things I thought it did. Bummer.
Guest Carnivor Posted February 19, 2003 Report Posted February 19, 2003 i think alot of you are forgetting this is a phone with some characteristics of a ppc, and not a fully blown ppc with a phone built in, i think the calc is perfect and fast to do simple maths, ffs if you want to do complex maths use your pc, rant over.
Guest madu Posted February 19, 2003 Report Posted February 19, 2003 If you are implying that I'm bit _un_cleva then you're slightly mistaking :) Seriously though A*32% is a bit faster than A/100*32 innit? Especially if you have to find the right key for the function every time he. And what would _un_mathematical people do? Guess they would just use a normal calc hehe ;)
Guest tom Posted February 19, 2003 Report Posted February 19, 2003 Quiet, you, or I'll prove that 0.9 recurring = 1 :) ;)
Guest madu Posted February 19, 2003 Report Posted February 19, 2003 Go on then! ..and I'l prove that 2+2 is 5 when calculated in a different dimension!
Guest tom Posted February 19, 2003 Report Posted February 19, 2003 Moo, I found it to be the best way to keep my mother quiet when I was living at home ;-) X = 0.999.... (i.e. 0.9 recurring) 10X = 9.999.... 10X - X = 9.999... - 0.999... 9X = 9 X = 1 0.999... = 1 :-P (I can't believe I'm this bored)
Guest Kallisti Posted February 19, 2003 Report Posted February 19, 2003 I can't believe I'm using my 50th post to point out that you can't add and subtract recurring numbers like that :) Yey, I'm a regular now!
Guest mattat Posted February 19, 2003 Report Posted February 19, 2003 although A*32% is a bit faster than A/100*32, A*.32 is just as fast (and hardly requires an A-Level in maths (not that A-Level maths ever teaches you how to add things up - just differentiate things mainly)
Guest HelloDave Posted February 19, 2003 Report Posted February 19, 2003 not that A-Level maths ever teaches you how to add things up - just differentiate things mainly Very true - now that was a waste of 2 years, I still haven't found a useful application for differentiation! I always found that people who didn't do A-level maths were better at adding up than those that did, maybe becuase we always thought just doing 2+2 was way too simple - far better to prove it first, and throw some x's in for old times' sake :wink:
Guest Monolithix [MVP] Posted February 19, 2003 Report Posted February 19, 2003 You can differenciate _anything_ :/
Guest tom Posted February 20, 2003 Report Posted February 20, 2003 You can add and subtract recurring numbers, they're perfectly valid! :-) (don't get me started on doing stuff with sqrt -1) 1/3 + 1/3 = 2/3 = 0.6 recurring This is no different from writing 0.3 recurring + 0.3 recurring = 0.6 recurring About the only thing out there that people constantly get confused about is infinity. You cannot do regular mathematical operations with infinity because it is a term not a value. Hence, dividing a number by zero is not allowed as anything divided by zero is infinity. Finally, you mention adding and subtracting, but multiplication is simply repeteated adding just as dividing is repeated subtracting. Seriously. It's all valid maths :-)
Guest madu Posted February 20, 2003 Report Posted February 20, 2003 Ok. Division be zero produces an infinite number. In your calculations proving that 0.9' is 1 is basically saying (since we are going infinite and these calculations omit the fact) that 9.99999999999999999999' is so close to 1 that in effect it can be considered as such. What your calculations actually omit is that you ignore 1 decimal point. Even in infinity when 0.9' is multiplied by 10 the 0.9' figure will always be one decimal point in front of 9.9' PS: Just as an example since it would contradict the whole thing because example is not in 'infinity' 0.9999 x 10 = 9.999 That is the ONE decimal place I am talking about. So in effect 0.9' x 10 =9.9' 9.9' - 0.9' = 9.0 - 9x10(-n) BUT if you were to just do 9.9'-0.9' then it would be valid to say expression is equal to 9.0 since the two recurring figures are in the same 'timeframe' (hmmm, maybe decimal points are all there is to timetravel??) :)
Guest tom Posted February 20, 2003 Report Posted February 20, 2003 No, my calculation proves that 0.9' is another way of writing 1, just as 1/1 = 1. If a number has an infinite amount of decimal places, I fail to understand why this would suddenly stop when you multiply said number by ten. Again, for example, 1/3 = 0.3' 10 * 1/3 = 10/3 = 3.3' How can this be true for fractions and not for my example. I didn't want to write this, but an often-overlooked part of learning fractions whilst at schools is contained here. If 1/3 = 0.3' and 2/3 = 0.6', how come 3/3 = 1, where does that "extra bit " come from?
Guest Bazz Posted February 20, 2003 Report Posted February 20, 2003 1/3 does not equal 0.3' it's just an almost equivalent way of writing it. 1/3 cannot be written in decimal terms. Can't believe I'm getting drawn into this incredibly geeky argument...
Guest tom Posted February 20, 2003 Report Posted February 20, 2003 Oh come off it, that's like saying 1/1 doesn't equal 1 because you can't write it down as 1.0 recurring
Guest tom Posted February 20, 2003 Report Posted February 20, 2003 I'm asking why you'll accept 1/1 = 1 as being valid when there's no reason to say that it should be 1/1 = 1.0 recurring, i.e. that 1 can have an infinite number of decimal places (all zero) after it.
Guest madu Posted February 20, 2003 Report Posted February 20, 2003 Because one is 'common' math and the other goes into 'infinite' so 1/1 is actually 1. period. and 1/3 is 0.3' recurring thus infinite. Don't mix things up. Go speak to your maths teacher :)
Guest spacemonkey Posted February 20, 2003 Report Posted February 20, 2003 X = 3/9 (ie 0.3 recurring) X = 0.33333' 10X = 3.33333' 10X - X = 3.3333' - 0.33333' 9X = 3 X = 3/9 The problem is not addition of recurring numbers, it is that 0.9' doesn't exist. It's a phony. The reason you have recurring numbers is because we want to express a fraction as a decimal. Ie. 1/3 (3/9) is 0.3333' Find me the fraction that evaluates to 0.999' and I'll eat my hat cos it doesn't exist.
Guest tom Posted February 20, 2003 Report Posted February 20, 2003 But why is 1/3 *not* infinite? Quick google draws up http://mathforum.org/dr.math/faq/faq.0.9999.html and (more interestingly imho) http://forums.philosophyforums.com/showthr...hp?threadid=438 (and does it really need to be pointed out that I dropped out of 'A' level maths a good few years ago now :-))
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now