HP 35S Scientific Calculator, 14 Characters LCD

2020-07-01T20:00:00

I am very dissapointed with the quality of this calculator. I have owned many HP RPN calculators starting from before engineering school until now. I started with a couple HP 11c calculators as hand me downs in which the buttons worked great. Once in college, I purchased an HP 32 (Pretty sure that was the model number). The buttons worked great on that one as well and the calculator finally failed after many years of great use. Fast forward to the HP 35S era. Very disappointed here!! I have owned/limped along with two or three of them up until now. Each one of them were deemed unfunctional to me because of the buttons/keyboard. The buttons press but periodically do not register with the circuit board. I had to look at every keypress to ensure registering. Once frustrated enough, I was forced to purchase another one which would work fine for a small amount of time before having the same exact thing happen again. My current one has gotten me to this point to where it is far from trustworthy. One missed keystroke will cost me thousands of dollars since I am using it for estimating costs of potential jobs. This is the last HP 35S for me. I keep checking to see if HP has come up with a new model but I have not seen one yet.

Stm757

Originally posted at

2020-05-14T20:00:00

It's a very good scientific calculator with all the features of the earlier HP voyager series. It is not flimsy and the keys have a good positive feel. The 2 line display that lets you see the X and Y stack registers is great.

mamookie

Originally posted at

2020-05-07T20:00:00

Much prefer the HP 15C Scientific Calculator which is what we use for technical projects. Bought the HP 35S as a backup, but hope we never have to go there.

Seven48

Originally posted at

2020-03-11T20:00:00

Exactly what I needed and with the best price, in store or online

Toniak

Originally posted at

2020-03-04T19:00:00

Was hoping to replace my 42S but they are not made anymore. Only have couple days of use. The 36S is larger and lacks the quality feel of the 42S. Keyboard has crisper more tactile snap when key is pressed compared to 42S. Like being able to enter fractions directly, nice feature when adding or subtracting measurements. Fraction mode good is someone needs to borrow it.

Luke1

Originally posted at

2020-03-01T19:00:00

I've owned and used HP Engineering calculators for 40 years. This is another solid HP calculator with all the features you need.

KJC1953

Originally posted at

2020-02-01T19:00:00

I have owned HP calculators for over 30 years. I still have a 15c and also a 42s and a Prime graphing calculator. HP makes the best calculators, period. I just love RPN, it SO superior to using algebraic calculation. The 35s does it all. The keys are just right. It has a lot of functions, but most are visible in blue or yellow or white, and not hard to find.

Daan B.

Originally posted at

2020-01-07T19:00:00

Recent purchase, so made in the Philippines and no keyboard errors. Very capable calculator with 10x more memory and much faster processing than older models. Crisp chicklets (keys). Longevity unknown, but less capable older models used extensively for 20+ years. Life and technology move on. Also own 30th anniversary 12C which operates flawlessly; very pleased with 12C and 15C apps. Very satisfied with the form and function of the purchases.

Old T.

Originally posted at

2019-12-23T19:00:00

I purchased the 35s as a gift for one of my former students. With this HP product, he can hone his skills further. He is already familiar with the 33s. His future for success is a little brighter.

RHP22

Originally posted at

2019-11-07T19:00:00

It's great to know I can still get a calculator with RPN!

Doland

Originally posted at

2019-10-09T15:19:37

I purchased my first HP Calculator when I was in College at the University of California, Berkeley. I was in a surveying class. It was 1972. The professor was having to look up sines, cosines, and tangents in the tables until he discovered I had the calculator. Then he began asking me to punch it in and give him the value. In the next surveying class that I took -- the next level up -- everyone had a calculator. The best ones were always HP. I've never stopped using HP.

L B.

2019-09-25T20:00:00

the calculator is OK but the 0 key doesn't always work. Sometimes I have to push it 2-3 times to enter a 0.

Engineer 1.

Originally posted at

2019-09-19T20:00:00

Could have better battery life, but all around a really solid calculator. Highly recommend for those looking for a new RPN calculator with the solid feel that HP has been known to deliver decade after decade.

nkeck72

Originally posted at

2019-09-11T20:00:00

I have always loved HP Scientific Calculators and I love the HP 35s model as well. I am showing my age when I say; I used to have to load Engineering programs by keying the whole program by hand each time that I needed to use it. I just can't remember the model #. I won't live long enough to use the HP 35s to get maximum usage from it. I am 71 years OLD next month!!!

My S.

Originally posted at

2019-09-07T20:00:00

I can't stand how often I have to replace the inconvenient CR2025 batteries. A real pain!

geographer847

Originally posted at

2019-07-15T20:00:00

I am happy that the HP35S is RPN and that it is programable. However, the programing details appear to be a bit more complex than the HP42S - which it have used professionally since its original production. I still have a 42 but it just failed - can it be serviced? I will get to love the 35 in time. Thanks for keeping RPN alive. What is the status of the HP Prime?

1JOE P.

Originally posted at

2019-06-15T20:00:00

Love my HP RPN based Calculator. Considered old technology but still has a place

dj81

Originally posted at

2019-04-01T20:00:00

I have previously owned two HP's during my entire career as an engineer and while in college. Overall averaged about 16 years for each of the calculators. Both had been awesome. I am contemplating making a framed shadowbox featuring the old calculators as a way to honor them. I could not bear to just toss the calculators even though they had failed. I was so sad when each of them finally failed but happy to find the 35s. The new one sits on my desk ready for any calculation I need. I love them.

Peteye

Originally posted at

2019-03-15T20:00:00

This calculator is an effective replacement for the HP-33S . It combines programming power with multiple functions and good memory allocation for effective analysis of problems without needing a computer.

Kpflint42

Originally posted at

2018-12-16T19:00:00

Purchased to replace my 15C. Disappointed in the calculator as a RPN calculator. Appears HP tried to reach some of the algebraic users by including the ability to use it as an algebraic calculator. However, to do so they compromised key features of the RPN but making it more difficult to use functions and features that I use on a daily basis in my work. The key advantage of a RPN is the reduced number or key strokes needed for many calculations. This advantage is lost on the 35S.

acowman

Originally posted at

2018-08-26T20:00:00

I've got an old HP11c that still works perfectly to this day. I've gone through two HP32sii that have had keypad faults rendering them useless but I really liked its features. So I've broken down and bought the 35s. The displays is very nice. The keypad feels very cheap. Even worst than the 32sii and no where close to the feel of the 11c. The Theta symbol is easily confused for the number eight. Given the nice display, HP could have easily made the Theta symbol smaller and rounder, making reading polar number far easier. The Hex functionality seem nothing short of moronic. When the display is set for Hex mode, the user must still specify entry of a Hex number because the calculator defaults to base 10 entry. Then for Hex A-F, it uses keys labeled H-M. I guess because it was the only row with six keys in a row? It seems like all the good calculator designers have long since retired and they just threw a collage grad on the project to get the job done. I'm on the fence with this one.

ChristopherH

Originally posted at

2018-02-28T19:00:00

Keys don’t register properly, some click, others don’t. As the keys are the main factor inputting data into the machine, poor key quality means poor quality overall. C’mon HP, improve quality!

Disappointed75

Originally posted at

2018-02-13T19:00:00

This calculator replaced my 48s that died. I never came close to using all the features, and this has all the features I need for quick calculations at my desk. I have grown up with HP and RPN way of entering numbers.

dday

Originally posted at

2018-02-04T19:00:00

Like the two line display. I do miss the comma delimiter inserted for the thousand, million, etc upon entering a large number.

MichaelJ5794521

Originally posted at

2017-11-23T19:00:00

The HP 35s calculator's 'Tan' key did not work when received. (There is a self-check technique for checking each key - I strongly suggest doing this when you get your calculator.) The short lifetime for the keyboard (zero lifetime in my case) seems to be a recurring theme in many of the reviews here. Like many others, I have been buying HP handheld calculators for decades - pretty much since they first came out. I probably have a bought about a dozen of them. The quality and lifetime clearly has been declining in the more recent models, as is my desire to replace the one I just returned. I was hoping to get a real calculator because I hate the zero tactile feedback keyboard on the WP 34s on my iPhone, but I would rather have no tactile feedback with a glass-screen iphone-calculator then a real calculator with a physical keyboard that is non-responsive.

DeadKeyWhenReceived

Originally posted at

2017-10-09T20:00:00

After over 28 years with an HP32s, I finally had to replace my trusty calculator. (Which, by the way, should show the reliability and sturdiness of HP hardware.) And the 35s is just like my 32- almost. Some functions have moved on the keyboard, which is playing hob with "muscle memory" keyboard entries. (Example: I keep hitting the "5" key instead of the "8" key for "Hour-minute-second" conversion.) Irritating, but I can retrain my fingers. The keys feel firmer, with a more positive reaction. I really like this machine, and appreciate that RPN is not dead!

civiltech63

Originally posted at

2017-09-24T20:00:00

This is a good calculator because it preserves the superior RPN format, but it has gone backwards from the hp41/42 in terms of quality and usability. For example, take the square root of -1 on an HP42, and you get the correct imaginary answer. If you do the same thing on the HP35s, it will give you the error "SQRT(NEG)". The HP35 will only let you find the square root of -1 after you jump through several hoops! You need to first enter -1i0. Then you must raise it to the 1/2 power. You can't simply hit the square root key because that will give you the message "Invalid Data". I appreciate the fact that the price is much lower than the HP41/42, but it is a shame that this calculator technology has gone backwards while all other technology is moving forwards! Just the same, I am thankful that HP still makes a RPN scientific calculator.

Jack61

Originally posted at

2017-07-31T20:00:00

I have used HP RPN calculators for 40 years and love them. I have published code for them in 170 countries for specific engineering applications. I have been waiting for 4 decades for a small version of a RPN calculator that will fit in my shirt pocket... yea, less programming function, etc... no problem... just need a smallish version to have with me all the time... never saw it... still hoping.

kk001

Originally posted at

2017-07-20T20:00:00

I've been using HP RPN calculators for well over 20 years. In my opinion, any serious science or engineering student will be very well served by this device. This is the machine of choice in today's market.

JasotTurbot

Originally posted at

2017-07-18T20:00:00

This could be a great calculator, but suffers from a few substantial shortcomings, particularly in light of a target market being takers of the FE and PE exams. Good things: - Easy to enter complex values in rectangular and polar coords without fishing through menus. That's an improvement. - Speedier than the 48 series. Not so good things: - No complex conjugate function. One has to write a program to take the complex conjugate. This is not the end of the world and I realize that everything cannot be put into a calculator and that's why they are programmable, but this really is a ridiculous oversight. Why solve half the problem of working with phasors? - No simple, built-in quadratic solver. Once again, write a program. And I know what the HP response will be: use the solver. My response is: typing in an entire equation just to solve a quadratic equation is a silly solution to the true need to enter three coefficients. - Display of complex numbers - This is poor, particularly in polar notation. The theta symbol blends in far too easily to the real portion. - Speed. While initially feeling snappy in operation, particularly compared to its HP-48G distant cousins, the calculator seems to suffer from processor delays that lead to lost keystrokes. The speed of some calculations is also more than one would like, but this is driven by the strange choice to power a calculator from two CR2032s rather than AAAs. One gets the benefit of having a backup battery, but suffers from having slow performance due to the power supply. Deliberately slow execution speed in the name of saving a couple bucks in batteries is a historically bad decision that HP keeps making with its calculators. It was a punishing limitation on the 48 series and its sad to see it continue today. - Rectangular to Polar display switching. Once again, this is engineering bread and butter stuff and should not be buried knee deep in a menu structure. - Baby blue and red key labels. These are very indistinct. - Display in general: I understand the price point of the calculator, but it's sad to see such a poor display used in this day and age. A full dot matrix display would solve a lot of this calculators entry and display issues. In light of everything I have spent on an education and between testing fees and study references, a few dollars extra on a calculator is not a consideration. If the cost was double, I would not have cared as long as it was a complete solution that was permitted for the FE/PE. - No direct matrix entry and manipulation tools. Once again, where's my bread and butter, HP? You'll once again be writing code for something that should be standard. This is partly due to the display issue, but it is crazy not to have matrix entry and tools in an engineering calculator. Please don't tell me to directly enter the equations and use the solver. That's a terrible, clunky solution for a simple problem. In short, if you grew up on RPN and need to take the FE or PE, this is the calculator you will be stuck with. It's a good, basic RPN calculator, but has some serious oversights that you'll be suffering through and writing programs to fix. I honestly wish they would bring back the 48SX and just up the clock speed and remove the IRDA ports. It got the job done.

RPNUser

Originally posted at