CEMETECH
Leading The Way To The Future
Login [Register]
Username:
Password:
Autologin:

Don't have an account? Register now to chat, post, use our tools, and much more.
Latest Headlines
Online Users
There are 102 users online: 4 members, 85 guests and 13 bots.
Members: gbl08ma, keoni29, mstram, pimathbrainiac.
Bots: MSN/Bing (2), Spinn3r (2), Magpie Crawler (1), Googlebot (8).
RSS & Social Media
SAX
You must log in to view the SAX chat widget
This is an archived, read-only copy of the United-TI subforum , including posts and topic from May 2003 to April 2012. If you would like to discuss any of the topics in this forum, you can visit Cemetech's Technology & Calculator Open Topic subforum. Some of these topics may also be directly-linked to active Cemetech topics. If you are a Cemetech member with a linked United-TI account, you can link United-TI topics here with your current Cemetech topics.

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics. Calculator Tech Support => Technology & Calculator Open Topic
Author Message
critor


Member


Joined: 04 Feb 2009
Posts: 132

Posted: 07 Oct 2009 01:32:08 am    Post subject:

calc84maniac wrote:
Maybe the "O" is a zero?



Maybe.
Which would means in fact a serial with no letter at the end - first hardware.
(which is coherant, as K is producing old hardwares which have the extra RAM...)

The only way to be sure would be to open 2 similar calculators and to compare them.


But let's make things simple: it would be very usefull to open:
- a revision H calculator
- all calculators released by K
- a revision M calculator

Next, just post a big-quality photo of the motherboard.
I'll look up for a photo of a similar motherboard (same/previous/next revision), or for the similar calculator itself.
Back to top
ztrumpet


Active Member


Joined: 06 May 2009
Posts: 555

Posted: 07 Oct 2009 02:48:19 pm    Post subject:

I've got an M and a friend with a K. How do I open them? What do I take a picture of? Where is it (the motherboard)? I just don't want to mess anything up.

Last edited by Guest on 07 Oct 2009 02:49:17 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
calc84maniac


Elite


Joined: 22 Jan 2007
Posts: 770

Posted: 07 Oct 2009 05:33:31 pm    Post subject:

Okay, according to the data, the changes took place sometime from April 2007 to May 2007. And guess what the date of our oldest TI-Nspire rom versions are? May 2007. Hmm...
Back to top
critor


Member


Joined: 04 Feb 2009
Posts: 132

Posted: 07 Oct 2009 05:38:04 pm    Post subject:

ztrumpet wrote:
I've got an M and a friend with a K. How do I open them? What do I take a picture of? Where is it (the motherboard)? I just don't want to mess anything up.



There are 6 screws on the back of the calculator, plus 1 for the Lithium battery.

First you just have to unswcrew all oh them.

The 6 screws on the case are special: they hav an hexagonal form.


Either you've got the correctly calibrated hexagonal screw-driver...
Or, you may use a "plate" screw-driver (not to small to avoid damaging the screws, and not to big to make it fit in the screws).


Then I usually work on the top of the screen.
I press firmly on the lower case, and insert some lever between the cases.

There are 2 pastic clips on top of the screen.

Then, just moving the lower case laterally should unclip 2 other lateral clips.


After that, finding the motherboard is very easy.
There are only 2 main chips: the Flash ROM, and the CPU/RAM combo we've been talking about.

Just look at an opened TI-84+:
http://www.datamath.org/Graphing/JPEG_TI-84PLUS_A.htm#PCB
Back to top
benryves


Active Member


Joined: 23 Feb 2006
Posts: 564

Posted: 07 Oct 2009 06:10:53 pm    Post subject:

The screws on the back of the calculator require a Torx-6 bit (not a hex bit).
Back to top
Eeems


Advanced Member


Joined: 25 Jan 2009
Posts: 277

Posted: 07 Oct 2009 07:33:49 pm    Post subject:

doesn't doing this void the warranty?
Back to top
critor


Member


Joined: 04 Feb 2009
Posts: 132

Posted: 08 Oct 2009 01:22:06 am    Post subject:

benryves wrote:
The screws on the back of the calculator require a Torx-6 bit (not a hex bit).


Tank you - I didn't know the exact technical word in english.

eeems wrote:
doesn't doing this void the warranty?

Yes, of course - I sincerely forgot to mention it.
But I think this doesn't change anything now for K and older revisions, does it?
Back to top
calcdude84se


Member


Joined: 09 Aug 2009
Posts: 207

Posted: 08 Oct 2009 06:54:32 am    Post subject:

calc84maniac wrote:
Okay, according to the data, the changes took place sometime from April 2007 to May 2007. And guess what the date of our oldest TI-Nspire rom versions are? May 2007. Hmm...


I take it you're suggesting that TI started making bad 84's when they started the Nspire. Interesting way to attempt to make people buy it :biggrin:
Back to top
critor


Member


Joined: 04 Feb 2009
Posts: 132

Posted: 08 Oct 2009 11:21:13 am    Post subject:

calcdude84se wrote:
calc84maniac wrote:
Okay, according to the data, the changes took place sometime from April 2007 to May 2007. And guess what the date of our oldest TI-Nspire rom versions are? May 2007. Hmm...


I take it you're suggesting that TI started making bad 84's when they started the Nspire. Interesting way to attempt to make people buy it :biggrin:



I'm not sure about that reason, as it's a secret feature of the TI-84+.


But I've got a related question...

How much RAM is usable with the TI-nSpire used in 84+ mode?
Back to top
calc84maniac


Elite


Joined: 22 Jan 2007
Posts: 770

Posted: 08 Oct 2009 12:35:59 pm    Post subject:

critor wrote:
calcdude84se wrote:
calc84maniac wrote:
Okay, according to the data, the changes took place sometime from April 2007 to May 2007. And guess what the date of our oldest TI-Nspire rom versions are? May 2007. Hmm...


I take it you're suggesting that TI started making bad 84's when they started the Nspire. Interesting way to attempt to make people buy it :biggrin:



I'm not sure about that reason, as it's a secret feature of the TI-84+.


But I've got a related question...

How much RAM is usable with the TI-nSpire used in 84+ mode?

128KB.
Back to top
ztrumpet


Active Member


Joined: 06 May 2009
Posts: 555

Posted: 08 Oct 2009 04:43:19 pm    Post subject:

critor wrote:
eeems wrote:
doesn't doing this void the warranty?

Yes, of course - I sincerely forgot to mention it.
But I think this doesn't change anything now for K and older revisions, does it?
Sorry, but I really don't want to void my or my friend's warranty. Sad
I just don't want to mess anything up.
Back to top
Graphmastur


Advanced Member


Joined: 25 Mar 2009
Posts: 360

Posted: 08 Oct 2009 06:28:29 pm    Post subject:

I don't know if this helps, but on a teacher's calc, that had the little view port installed for the projector, it did not have a letter at the end. It just wasn't there. Weird.

It could mean the TI made bad calcs in order for us to by the NSpire. Of course, extra ram isn't a big reason to buy the NSpire, because it has less possibilities. Also, most people don't know about the extra ram. Is it just me, or did TI put everything into a sinking boat?


Last edited by Guest on 08 Oct 2009 06:29:55 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
ztrumpet


Active Member


Joined: 06 May 2009
Posts: 555

Posted: 08 Oct 2009 06:49:11 pm    Post subject:

Yeah, that's what my teacher's calc has, only it's a "C". (No letter on that one because it was before "A" because "A" was the first Revision) :)

I think TI...=TItanic.
Back to top
calcdude84se


Member


Joined: 09 Aug 2009
Posts: 207

Posted: 08 Oct 2009 07:19:30 pm    Post subject:

The only way that we'll like TI again is if we can crack the Nspire. (Or if they start giving us the tech support that we really want :biggrin:)
Back to top
fullmetalcoder


Member


Joined: 01 Aug 2009
Posts: 139

Posted: 09 Oct 2009 01:25:19 am    Post subject:

got a S-0404 (no rev letter) Ti84+ bought in fall 2004 which, as expected, works fine (128kb RAM, "proper" LCD).
Back to top
calcdude84se


Member


Joined: 09 Aug 2009
Posts: 207

Posted: 25 Oct 2009 06:57:22 am    Post subject:

I feel like summarizing our hypothesis in relation to our discoveries so far (Correct me if I'm wrong):

  • Before 2007, most of the manufacturing of TI-84+(SE) calculators was done in the S factory.
  • Most of those that came out have the 128 KB of RAM that is used by programs such as TI-Boy, Omnicalc's RAM Restore, Virtual Calc, Emu8x, etc.
  • The H versions only had 48 KB of RAM
  • Around 2007-08, when the Nspire came out, TI moved most of their manufacturing from the S factory to the P factory.
  • The amount of calcs with only 48 KB increased
  • The TI-84+(SE) calculators that came (and are coming) out of this factory have, for the most part, 48 KB of RAM
  • This means that the above programs no longer work correctly, if they work at all.
  • The K factory also made some calcs with revisions earlier than those made by the other two factories
  • If critor is right, than G and earlier have 128 KB and TA2/TA3 chip, while H and later have 48 KB and TA1 chip


Last edited by Guest on 25 Oct 2009 07:50:38 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
ztrumpet


Active Member


Joined: 06 May 2009
Posts: 555

Posted: 25 Oct 2009 01:06:13 pm    Post subject:

The S made H versions have 48KB of Ram.
There is also the K factory.


Last edited by Guest on 25 Oct 2009 01:06:34 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
calc84maniac


Elite


Joined: 22 Jan 2007
Posts: 770

Posted: 25 Oct 2009 01:16:02 pm    Post subject:

ztrumpet wrote:
The S made H versions have 48KB of Ram.
There is also the K factory.

This. ^^ The hardware change was made before the factory move.
Back to top
critor


Member


Joined: 04 Feb 2009
Posts: 132

Posted: 25 Oct 2009 06:12:26 pm    Post subject:

That's quite simple.

Every hardware revision up to G is using the TA2/TA3 chip with 128Kb RAM.
Every hardware revision since H is using the TA1 chip with only 48Kb RAM.

So just look at the end of the serial.


By the way... another information.
Someone (I don't know who any more) wondered if we could discover things about the bad lcd driver...
In the previous tests, the same hardware revision could pass or fail the LCD test...
So it seemed to be hardware-independant...

By opening some TI-84+ / TI-83+, I may have discovered something...


TI-84+: (hardware / date / factory / lcd driver)
03/2004 (S) Toshiba T6K04
05/2004 (S) Toshiba T6K04
08/2004 (S) Toshiba T6K04
F 06/2006 (S) Novatek NT7564H
G 04/2007 (S) Toshiba T6K04
J 03/2008 (P) Novatek NT7564H
L 03/2008 (P) Toshiba T6K04
L 04/2008 (P) Novatek NT7564H
M 05/2008 (P) Novatek NT7564H
M 08/2008 (P) Novatek NT7564H
L 02/2009 (P) Novatek NT7564H

The TI-84+ can have a different LCD driver.
There is the Toshiba T6K04, and the Novatek NT7564H.
And look at the L-revisions from 03/2008 and 04/2008.

They're using different LCD drivers, although the hardware code is the same (L).


I suppose our problems come from one of these chips...


And as there was no problem at the beginning, I suppose the Novatek chip is guilty.


Do you think I've guessed right again? Rolling Eyes


I'll try to open some more TI-84+...


Last edited by Guest on 25 Oct 2009 06:13:18 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
calcdude84se


Member


Joined: 09 Aug 2009
Posts: 207

Posted: 25 Oct 2009 07:51:09 pm    Post subject:

Added RAM-related info to list. Thanks for the corrections! Smile

Last edited by Guest on 25 Oct 2009 07:54:04 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Register to Join the Conversation
Have your own thoughts to add to this or any other topic? Want to ask a question, offer a suggestion, share your own programs and projects, upload a file to the file archives, get help with calculator and computer programming, or simply chat with like-minded coders and tech and calculator enthusiasts via the site-wide AJAX SAX widget? Registration for a free Cemetech account only takes a minute.

Go to Registration page
    Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 9, 10, 11  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Page 10 of 11 All times are GMT - 5 Hours

 

© Copyright 2000-2014 Cemetech & Kerm Martian :: Page Execution Time: 0.060001 seconds.