I've been using it for years and was surprised to see a new version after a dacade.
After installing it, I was surprised to see that the immediate changes most noticeable to me were that the input box was unnecessarily doubled in size, enclosed in an unnecessary border, and surrounded by unnecessary dead space; and that there's now marked input lag that never existed in the original version.
I never had a single problem with 0.12 over the past ten years, and use it nearly every day -- no bugs, no missing features.
I appreciate the desire to improve and innovate, but you know, sometimes, software really is finished.
Personally, I like it. And there's also an option to go back to classic view for some things.
Does it fix the input lag?
> sometimes, software really is finished.
That's never the case for any consumer app, the potential for improvement in UI is practically infinite. But also, just use the old version if it's finished, you don't need to upgrade?
(this app has plenty of bugs / missing issues just like everything else, for example, blurry text on some platforms)
> That's never the case for any consumer app, the potential for improvement in UI is practically infinite.
If that's true, how do you explain the observable pattern of many consumer applications degrading in UI functionality and coherence after a certain point?
> But also, just use the old version if it's finished, you don't need to upgrade?
Exactly. I reverted to 0.12.
> If that's true, how do you explain the observable pattern of many consumer applications degrading in UI functionality and coherence after a certain point?
Well, that's easy: Bad choices. The better something is, the easier it is to change it in a way, that makes it worse.
I agree with GP, everything can be improved, but that doesn't mean that you will succeed, or that you should try, for various, separate reasons.
I'm using it for a long time already. 1.0 and 1.1 are the first updates after 10 years now?
This is nice to see, and it looks like this release (and maybe some earlier ones?) includes a small order of operations bug fix that hadn't been released for a long time. 1/2(-9.8) now equals -4.9 rather than -0.05102040816326530612. I like how the expression also renders with a multiplication symbol to clarify: 1 / 2 × (−9.8)
This is such an ambiguous formula. It reminds me of those order-of-operations social media engagement baits.
> 1/2(-9.8) now equals -4.9 rather than -0.05102040816326530612
That should really be an error.
Love speedcrunch it has been sitting on my taskbar for many years always my go-to for quick scratchpad for equations, etc.
Speedcrunch might finally beat out opening a terminal w/ the R interpreter for me
What's the best scientific calculator for Android?
Why do you do this when you have Pari GP?
Amazing!
This is the most useful calculator.. bit shifts..radix conversations...
I've been using it for years after struggling missing the windows 2000 calculator.
I also recently made a fairly complete scientific calculator. I first asked Claude what functions it would put in it, then I made some modifications (added complex numbers), and told it to write the calculator. It looked perfect in one shot. This is really how simple this kind of thing has become.
Scientific calculators are surprisingly hard to get right. SpeedCrunch itself just fixed some calculation errors (usually its order of operations based, but not always). I’d be interested to see how accurate yours is, though I also wonder if there are lower level libraries to leverage to make it a moot point
I recently opened a github issue about the system UI looking dark. I got a response an hour later which appears to be AI written, I responded to it and it looks like my request has been accepted.
I absolutely do not mind it being AI driven. I have not seen this before in this. The response was not slop, just very formal and verbose.
I use speed crunch almost every day mostly to see bits and bit shift operations visually. It's just strange to see requesting feature, getting an automated further inquiry, and then a response that yeah that sounds good to do.
> I absolutely do not mind it being AI driven
Why do you think it was AI driven? It was more than likely human driven, but largely written by an AI to save time.