So apparently, after come chat in SAX, on the CE the Prod # on the About screen is not part of the Boot code or unique to each device. It's the OS's Prod #. Surely someone knew about this already.

Here are all the CE OS's Prod #'s:
5.0.0 EVT3 0024   13-07-05-1800
5.0.0 EVT3 0058   13-07-05-3A00   13-07-05-5900   13-07-05-0C00   13-07-05-6E00 ; SmartView   13-07-05-7000 ; 83   13-07-05-1300   13-07-05-2300   13-07-05-2A00   13-07-05-2B00   13-07-05-2500 ; 84   13-07-05-2A00 ; 83   13-07-05-3A00   13-07-05-1500? ; SmartView; Anyone have   13-07-05-1800 ; 83   13-07-05-1200 ; 83   13-07-05-1600 ; 84   13-07-05-2200   13-07-05-3400 ; 84 Chrome OS TI-84 Plus CE emulator   13-07-05-2600 ; 83   13-07-05-2C00 ; 83   13-07-05-0B00 ; 84T   13-07-05-1400 ; 84
Send the OS and that prod # will be on the About screen.

The CSE OS's and the Monochrome OS's seem to have no affect on the Prod # though.

Edit: Added 83PCE OS's
In the list you posted, the last 4 digits are just the OS build number.
You missed the protos Razz
    5.0.0 EVT3 0024

    5.0.0 EVT3 0058

Interestingly since it is based off the build number, and 5.0.0 EVT3 0058 have the same prod #.
So it appears that rom8x handles the Prod# in an incorrect way that causes 0A-1-01-01 (zeros in memory, I assume) to be used instead of the proper number.

Here are the TI-84 Plus OS Prod#'s
0.46     0A-A-7A-7A ?????
2.21     0A-3-02-15
2.22     0A-3-02-16
2.30     0A-3-02-1E
2.40     0A-3-02-28
2.41     0A-3-02-29
2.43     0A-3-02-2B
2.53MP   0A-3-02-35
2.55MP   0A-3-02-37

Edit: The second to last number in the Prod ID is the major version (5[.0.0.0089] for the CE, 2 for the 84+, etc.) the last number, as stated by DebrouxL, is the OS build number: (i.e. [5.0.0.]0089 == 5900h, [2.]30 == 1Eh).
The TI-83+ looks like it fits the patterns mentioned above (not that there was any reason to expect otherwise):
1.19: 04-1-01-13

But either the 68k calculators do not follow the same scheme, or they have an extra, internal build number, & also the penultimate number is not the major version:
TI-92+ HW2 2.09: 01-1-C-57
TI-89 Titanium (both HW3 & HW4) 3.10: 09-2-E-53

Note that all 4 parts are different between those two...perhaps comparison with other OS versions (especially 1.x) & other calculators (TI-89 non-Titanium, TI-92 with Plus module, V200) would reveal the pattern for AMS.
Here's a few 68ks of mine
    (proto) 1.02: 03-0-1-2E
    (proto) 1.00b8: 03-0-2-17
    2.05: 03-1-9-4C

    2.06: 08-2-A-5D

TI-92 Plus
    2.05: 01-1-9-4C

TI-89 Titanium
    3.00: 09-2-D-19
For the TI-68k series, the making of the product ID is documented, the online version being .
The header of AMS 3.10 for the 89T contains:

80 11 09 80 21 0e 80 32 00 53 80 a1 02

ROM_CALL AB_prodid calls copen, copensub, cfindfield, cgetfnl and finally sprintf.

The I variable in and below is effectively the contents of the 802(0) field. CalculatorType and I are obtained through a dirty shortcut; I made tiosmod+amspatch years before adding cert field parsing functions to libtifiles, . No absolute need to do it the pedantically correct way when the dirty way works on a closed set of versions, anyway.
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
Page 1 of 1
» All times are GMT - 5 Hours
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum