At that amount, it is possible to actually get a good calculator such as the TI-89, used.

And I would very much recommend doing that, over an unproven new device that claims to be Open Source while actually using license that is not.

Actually, the only page in the site to claim "open source" with regards to the calculator is a blog article[1] by a non-technical staff. Elsewhere, it is only referred to as an "open" graphing calculator. The HN submission is titled incorrectly.

[1] https://www.numworks.com/blog/interview-kevin-from-virginia/

>the only page in the site to claim "open source" with regards to the calculator is a blog article[1] by a non-technical staff.

They should fix this immediately and keep their employees under check. It is a PR disaster.

They should also inform their non-technical personel during on-boarding about the significance of the "open-source" term in terms of licensing.

There are organizations and corporations that focus on such terms during on-boarding either because that's their development model or they are aware that using such a term while not adhering to it could draw valid criticism.

> And I would very much recommend doing that, over an unproven new device that claims to be Open Source while actually using license that is not.

This demand for ideological purity is why open source is a complete failure and the market is dominated by closed systems.

I believe such market domination in the technological stack that powers most servers isn't evident but I would appreciate a citation. In addition, market domination in any market domain is determined by several complex factors.

Those servers use that stack as a component in closed systems, exactly the way Apple and Google use open source as part of their closed systems.

Frankly the argument that Linux powers servers is a red herring.

Look around at the devices people use.

Yes, some hackers like us use Linux boxes. Yes, there are some possibilities opening with things like the raspberry pi.

No, open systems are not succeeding in displacing closed ones.

Recommending people buy a closed system instead of one which is open source to punish the company for not complying with an ideology does not help the growth of open source.

>instead of one which is open source

It is NOT OPEN SOURCE, for the nth time.

We are not about to tolerate corporate interests redefining what Open Source is.

Complaining is one of the ways we do show this.

It's marketed like the "iPhone of calculators", so obviously it needs to have an iPhone like price.

Or said otherwise, it's a calculator for cool people (well, as cool you can be wielding a calculator).

The fact that there is design work to be amortized and that the market is low so far?