Their demo of their efficient interface compared to GNU Calc:
SC: 5+8 Enter [4 keys, 1 shift]
Calc: 5 RET 8 + [4 keys, 1 shift]
SC: 5*(113+23) Enter [11 keys, 3 shifts]
Calc: 5 RET 113 RET 23 + * [10 keys, 1 shift]
SC: 7*ans Enter [6 keys, 1 shift]
Calc: 7 * [2 keys, 1 shift]
SC: sqrt(1231+41) Enter [14 keys, 3 shift]
Calc: 1231 RET 41 + Q [9 keys, 1 shift]
Maybe it’s more efficient than clicking buttons with a mouse but it doesn’t feel more efficient than the calculator I already use, nor does it seem to be better integrated with the software I use. It doesn’t even seem more efficient than the scientific calculator I used in high school.
I think I’m put off more by the lack of graphing and (as far as I could tell skimming their site) array/vector/matrix functions, which are the main things I do with Calc.
You're comparing infix with RPN. There are more factors there than just number of keystrokes; not everyone enjoys working with RPN or finds it comfortable. RPN is a deliberate tradeoff in favor of speed/efficiency at the expense of other things.
The calculator I used in school was infix but, unlike this calculator, had:
- single buttons for common operations like +, * or sqrt
- no shifted parentheses
- display-style input of fractions and exponential so you got some visual clue if your brackets weren’t totally wrong
- single (sometimes shifted) buttons for functions like cos/tan/arcsin/…
- specialised shift operators which mostly meant inverse or hyperbolic
GNU Calc has most of these (+ and * are still shifted but all common operations are shifted. Parentheses are not used because of RPN. Display-style (‘big’) presentation is optional but ugly ascii art. Press H for hyperbolic, I for inverse).
I think gnu Calc is lacking a bit in entry of algebraic expressions but I don’t think speed crunch is better. I’d like to see something that let you place a ‘(‘ somewhere ‘backwards’, or in other words a feature for ‘I would like to parenthetical use some of the past expressions. Please let me interactively choose them without fiddling with cursor movement commands.’
I don’t have a horse in the race (I find myself still using the default of whatever OS I’m using more often than I specifically choose SC) but I will say that one can easily configure SC to operate with past calculated results and other references from previous operations, just as you did with your cited GNUCalc examples. If such shortcuts are utilised, one will find SC requires the same number keystrokes - or fewer.
I think I’m put off more by the lack of graphing and (as far as I could tell skimming their site) array/vector/matrix functions, which are the main things I do with Calc.