Re: More help wanted at OpenRPN.org
- From: "James M. Prange" <jmprange@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 19:13:41 -0400
hugh.evans@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Your argument has changed my mind, the MMC/SD slot willl be external.
Good decision! I don't really need a spring-loaded ejection
mechanism (and its eventual failure), but I wouldn't want to have
to remove screws just to insert or eject the card; considering how
often I do this on the 49g+, I may as well toss the screws.
That said, the spring-loaded ejection mechanism allows the card
edge to be flush with the case. If the thumb-nail slot on the card
were used for removing it, I'd want to be able to reach it without
having the card protruding beyond the main outline of the case.
Maybe include "rubber" plugs for the card and I/O slots to offer
more protection from water and dust?
I agree that the screws are better not concealed, but I'd rather
try to avoid having them a potential place for water to seep in,
so maybe having them on the back or covered with rubber plugs
would be a good design.
For the 49g+ retrofit, considering how often the AAA cells need to
be changed on the 49g+, I'd much rather not have to remove any
screws to replace them either. Please consider AA cells instead of
AAA cells; they store more energy (longer battery life) and are
cheaper besides; I'd gladly put up with a somewhat larger and
heavier calculator for these advantages (although C or D cells
would be a bit too much).
If the battery life were similar to the Voyager series' (years
instead of weeks or months), then removing screws to replace the
battery might be acceptable.
There would be some advantage to allowing for an external power
source, although of course a non-rechargeable internal battery
would have to be disconnected or otherwise protected while
external power is connected. But an external power option has the
disadvantage that a user could connect the wrong power source, and
"Murphy's law" suggests that sooner or later someone would, so the
safety and liability implications would have to be considered.
Where can we find more information about the 49g+ retrofit?
--
Regards,
James
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: More help wanted at OpenRPN.org
- From: John H Meyers
- Re: More help wanted at OpenRPN.org
- References:
- Re: More help wanted at OpenRPN.org
- From: amellan@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: More help wanted at OpenRPN.org
- From: Joel Kolstad
- Re: More help wanted at OpenRPN.org
- From: hugh . evans
- Re: More help wanted at OpenRPN.org
- From: Joel Kolstad
- Re: More help wanted at OpenRPN.org
- From: hugh . evans
- Re: More help wanted at OpenRPN.org
- From: Joel Kolstad
- Re: More help wanted at OpenRPN.org
- From: hugh . evans
- Re: More help wanted at OpenRPN.org
- From: Joel Kolstad
- Re: More help wanted at OpenRPN.org
- From: John H Meyers
- Re: More help wanted at OpenRPN.org
- From: John H Meyers
- Re: More help wanted at OpenRPN.org
- From: hugh . evans
- Re: More help wanted at OpenRPN.org
- From: John H Meyers
- Re: More help wanted at OpenRPN.org
- From: hugh . evans
- Re: More help wanted at OpenRPN.org
- Prev by Date: Re: More help wanted at OpenRPN.org
- Next by Date: Re: StdIOPAR sysRPL?
- Previous by thread: Re: More help wanted at OpenRPN.org
- Next by thread: Re: More help wanted at OpenRPN.org
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading