I've had good experiences with their EliteBook lines. Solid machines, if you are closer to the rugged notebook vs thin trophy book on the scale of laptop thickness.
OTOH, if you are engineer faced with the problem of picking some number between the respective economical constraints (ie. pick a number not much higher than 2.25 or not much higher than 3, both of which are somewhat well known estimates of manufacturing overhead) you are somewhat likely to come up with these two transcendentals.
At most hardware companies, this is the starting point. As in, a flat multiple is the baseline, before S&M and other overheard costs are re-integrated by Finance into product cost.
Indeed. Same thing when I was a hardware engineer. However, I think the GP loves it due to the use of Pi and 'e' as the constants. We used 3 I seem to remember, but we included some amount for assembly and test, which I bet would come close to Pi.
> HP typically priced their equipment at the cost of the material list × π (or in an especially competitive market, list × e)