As a regular forum user, it has been brought to my attention that every now and then, we will see the term «ti-8x» being thrown around. Unlike saying «nspire series», ti-8x seems to stand in a bit of a gray area when it comes to which calculators are included in this category. On one hand, there is the syntactical interpretation, which implies that the ti-8x series includes every model from the ti-80 to the ti-89. On the other hand, when some people mention ti-8x, they mean the monochrome Z80 members of the ti-83 and ti-84 family only. I personally have always thought it was the syntactical interpretation but I want to know what most people think it should be.
Here is a list of the included calculators for the syntactical interpretation:

ti-80
ti-81
ti-82
ti-82 stats
ti-82 stats.fr
ti-82 advanced
ti-82 +
ti-83
ti-83 +
ti-83 + SE
ti-83 plus.fr
ti-83 premium CE
ti-84 +
ti-84 + T
ti-84 + SE
ti-84 + CSE
ti-84 + CE
ti-84 + CE T
ti-84 pocket.fr
ti-84 pocket SE
ti-85
ti-86
ti-89
ti-89 titanium

Here is the list of the 2nd interpretation:

ti-84 +
ti-84 + SE
ti-83
ti-83 +

Please inform me if I've forgotten any in either of the interpretations. Hopefully we can get this sorted out with an official list of the included calculators and remove the ambiguity.
As pointed out by Kerm himself, we should also adress the nomenclature regarding the «plus» in calculator names. As you may have noticed in the lists above, I opted for the «+» rather than writing down «plus» where it felt appropriate to do so. I would also like to know how the majority believes it should be written in an attempt to standardize the way we write down calculator names.

I would consider TI-8x calculators to be only the 83/84+ family. TI officially uses .8x* in file naming specifically relating to 83/84+ calculators, whereas other calculator families get explicit naming (e.g. .89p). There are also great technical differences among calculators numbered 80 through 89. This similar numbering ought not to be confused with the actual grouping and families of the calculators.

I usually exclude non-z80/non-ez80 models. I usually refer to the TI-89 as 68k and the TI-80 as garbage.

I think of the 8x calculators as everything with a TI-83 or TI-84 in its name, so the TI-83, TI-83+, TI-83+SE, TI-84+, TI-84+SE, TI-84 Pocket.fr, TI-84 Plus C Silver Edition, TI-84 Plus CE, and TI-84 Premium CE (and all those strange French variations on the monochrome TI-83 Plus/TI-84 Plus with inexplicably confusing names). I used to consider it just the monochrome TI-83 through TI-84 Plus Silver Edition, but I arbitrarily decided to include the color calculators because it seemed reasonable, given their z80 and ez80 heritage.

On the +/Plus front, I used to always use the +, a la TI-83+/TI-84+, but the more I've had to write the calculator names for official Cemetech pages (like our Tools reference section), the more I've spelled out the Plus. You can see my continued inconsistency in this post.

I would think all the calculators that use the extension .8x with another letter after.

Just to be that guy. Do we include the 73 in this as it technically is an 83?

I don't think I use the term "TI-8x" myself, preferring to use more unambiguous terms like "Z80 calcs", "68K calcs", "TI-83+/84+ family", or "TI-84+CE". When I see the term "TI-8x", I kind of rely on context to understand what's meant, so I never really thought about it. So that's a good question!

I feel that "TI-8X" would, in the most literal sense, refer to everything from TI-80 to TI-89. However, I doubt that is the usual intended meaning, and it seems unlikely that someone would need a term to refer to all of those models while specifically excluding the TI-73 and TI-92/92+/V200. So, when I see "TI-8x" or "TI-8X", I assume that it either means the 83/83+/84+ models or all Z80 models, depending on context.

As for what it should mean, I have no opinion. I'd personally rather people just drop the term altogether and use the less ambiguous phrases so we don't have to deal with the confusion in the first place.

For "+" vs. "Plus", I usually use "+" in informal writing. In more formal prose, I would probably write "Plus", though I don't seem to encounter such situations very often. In the case of editing an existing document or site, I use whichever is consistent with the existing text (for instance, when I create new ticalc.org file archive directories, I write "Plus" because all the original directories are written that way).



I got a bit of a laugh out of that punchline. Thanks.

Now, in what cases would the CE be excluded when referring to 8x?

It means either a TI-85 or a TI-86 ... and perhaps also a TI-83 Plus if you can somehow tolerate having a non-memory mapped screen that is only 96 pixels wide.

The ti-84 plus CE and ti-83 premium CE are some of the most ambiguous models because they are different in some ways from the previous ti-84s and 83s in that they have a color screen and an EZ80 processor, but they still remains incredibly similar in the way they can be programmed and the way they are used (kind of like the grandchildren of the z80s) therefore, people will often say ti-8x to represent the non-color models regardless of their names.

I feel that this 'unfair' so to say, since the +CE is also a 84 and same for the TI83PCE. Even though they are different, the + and premium CEs are still called 84s and 83s and rightfully not including them seems misplaced.

Edit: I had a conversation about this with op over SAX