News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by CrendKing on Monday March 07, 2022 @06:03PM (#30594522)
The one thing I don't get about all those calculator applications is the existence of the keypad. Like, the users already have the keypad right in front them called keyboard (the names literally share the "key" part). Why would anyone instead choose to use mouse to click those tiny buttons? I feel most calc designers still stuck at the skeuomorphism and never jump out of the box to think about what user really needs.

The only calculators I know that makes keypad optional/hideable are SpeedCrunch and Qalculate!, and now this.

Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by mewse on Monday March 07, 2022 @06:12PM (#30594590)
“skeuomorphism” isn’t even a real UX concept; it’s just been carefully designed to look like one.
Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by Bud on Monday March 07, 2022 @08:49PM (#30595594)
Well played.
Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by Etherlord87 on Tuesday March 08, 2022 @04:53AM (#30598252)
I am a Windows power user, and the default Windows calculator is one of very few programs bundled with the OS that I actually use - and I use it quite frequently.

And I click on the number digits.

Why?

1. Usually I only click on a few buttons, for example I paste some number, then press / then 2, and then typically ENTER key on the numpad (because I can just press it with the thumb of the hand still holding the mouse). Why should I move my hand from the mouse to the keyboard in order to just press two keys? And then I would also need to check if Num Lock is enabled.

2. I had a phase trying Emacs and Vim and eventually decided I don't care about being more efficient at text editing. I want to edit the text effortlessly, and I find selecting text with mouse, or pressing arrow keys repeatedly, actually requiring less effort from me. Yes, it takes more time, but it's not a time lost, I'm thinking about some problem, and no part of my brain needs to think what kind of text editing function I should use. Likewise, clicking a few buttons in a calculator takes more time, but it's not a race. If I have to make a lot of calculations, I'm more likely to use Excel, so it's rare that I actually type stuff into the calculator.

3. Sometimes my left hand is simply not available (I'm petting my dog or eating something or maybe holding my laptop), and while I have a numpad, using functions like sine would require my right hand to travel. In similar vein, sometimes instead of Ctrl+clicking on a link to open it in a new tab, I just right-click, and choose a context option. It does annoy me slightly, but sometimes not enough to start using my left hand.

Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by CrendKing on Tuesday March 08, 2022 @02:33PM (#30605311)
Your use cases are valid and should be respected and supported. What I was saying is, there are other people who prefer keyboard for efficiency, and they don't need keypad. Make it optional and hideable so that all users are happy. It's very simple change in terms of code diff, but it seems very hard in terms of design choice since even Microsoft doesn't get it.
Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by paledot on Tuesday March 08, 2022 @04:42PM (#30607516)
Making the keypad optional adds user confusion. It might be a worthwhile tradeoff if doing so is necessary to save screen space, but if the keypad is actually accounting for such a significant portion of your screen real estate, I'd love to see your monitor.
Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by Etherlord87 on Wednesday March 09, 2022 @05:49AM (#30613119)
As I hinted in my previous comment, power users of Windows, don't use apps bundled with Windows! :D

You can download a calculator that is designed to your preferences. I actually wrote a calculator in Autohotkey that was a keylogger constantly checking if last typed characters can be interpreted as a mathematical expression - if so, the expression was evaluated and displayed as a tooltip, and pressing a shortcut could be pressed to paste an equal sign and that evaluated value. Never finished it though, demotivated by how hard it was to port to other OSes.

Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by user3939382 on Monday March 07, 2022 @11:27PM (#30596443)
Checkout Soulver on macOS. It’s awesome! It’s like an old paper tape calculator on steroids. It supports variables and comments, for example. Also, no virtual keypad :)
Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by upbeat_general on Monday March 07, 2022 @11:36PM (#30596497)
+1

The real draw is the unit support (dates, times, currency, etc etc) but makes it feel natural.

Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by ksec on Tuesday March 08, 2022 @06:18AM (#30598713)
Still waiting for Soulver update on iOS .
Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by xupybd on Monday March 07, 2022 @06:07PM (#30594555)
We have calculators open on our machine label computers. Those computers don't have a keyboard only a touch screen. Without the keypad these computers could not use the windows calculator. That said this is an unusual use case.
Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by sidpatil on Monday March 07, 2022 @10:26PM (#30596096)
If someone was trying to enter text into a running application on that machine, wouldn't an on-screen keyboard pop up? (Unless that's been disabled, of course.)
Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by xupybd on Tuesday March 08, 2022 @12:43AM (#30596824)
No it doesn't pop up automatically. It can be brought up but you have to find it.

Anything other than day to day use is done via remote connection.

Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by fendy3002 on Monday March 07, 2022 @07:17PM (#30595041)
Well until you need scientific calculator computation, such as log, sin / cos, rad / deg, root.
Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by charcircuit on Monday March 07, 2022 @10:33PM (#30596133)
Your keyboard has letters on it. You can type all of those out.
Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by CydeWeys on Monday March 07, 2022 @11:11PM (#30596362)
The one disadvantage of that is you cannot easily see all available functions at once. It loses discoverability. Autocomplete on the input prompt will help rectify that somewhat, but only somewhat.
Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by qsort on Monday March 07, 2022 @11:29PM (#30596460)
The discoverability argument doesn't make a lot of sense for a calculator app.

One might want to list the content of a directory without knowing that the magic word is "ls", but there is a 0% chance that someone wants to compute the cosine of a number but can't figure out to type "cos".

Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by jart on Monday March 07, 2022 @11:48PM (#30596554)
But is it cos x, cos(x), cos[x], math.cos(x), or \cos x? Calculators are usually simple enough that all the ops can be buttons. So why not do it? There's always alternatives like Python, Mathematica, Maxima, Fricas, etc. which don't really bother with the buttons, because if they did, it'd look like a Chinese typewriter.
Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by fendy3002 on Tuesday March 08, 2022 @05:22AM (#30598395)
Additionally it also hinders those who do not natively speak English. Sqrt or square root and pow aren't terms that commonly used in calculator for other languages, at least my country.

And I guess sqrt shortform isn't that common used either.

Able to see symbols can clear those ambiguity

Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by Induane on Tuesday March 08, 2022 @09:58AM (#30600578)
I don't mind the buttons for special functions, but for numbers and operators? Yeesh that's redundant. I can type 0 through 9, + and - without needing discoverability for sure. At minimum I assume the calculator does arithmetic. Buttons for special features tell me it does other things too.
Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by Aachen on Monday March 07, 2022 @08:18PM (#30595405)
I think they were talking about the number keys, and perhaps plus and equals (but that might need shift depending on the keyboard and be less convenient), not cosine and family.
Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by mackrevinack on Tuesday March 08, 2022 @08:07AM (#30599437)
> The only calculators I know that makes keypad optional/hideable are SpeedCrunch and Qalculate!, and now this.

or theres "invisible" calculators like this[1] that do away with GUI altogether. microsoft's onenote has something similar built in as well

1: https://github.com/davebrny/in-line-calculator

Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by antholeole on Monday March 07, 2022 @09:27PM (#30595787)
Desmos.com/scientific is my go to. Best calculator ever - understands some LaTeX but also has the buttons for scenarios where I don’t know the LaTeX
Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by avmich on Monday March 07, 2022 @10:44PM (#30596213)
If you have a J interpreter installed, I'd like to see what preferred calculators can offer.
Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by krallja on Monday March 07, 2022 @08:02PM (#30595311)
What about Calca or Soulver? They don’t have keypads at all. They’re more like REPLs for calculation languages.
Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by bufferoverflow on Monday March 07, 2022 @08:28PM (#30595466)
Touchscreens
Re:Show HN: All desktop software calculators are wrong, so I... by topspin on Monday March 07, 2022 @08:34PM (#30595495)
SpeQ Mathematics has been my go-to for many years. The times have left it behind, but it's still too handy to forego. It's a simple, vanishingly small (132KB) REPL.