Ah, that makes sense. I should consider a better way to back up the folders too, then...

And yet you're a proud supporter of Vista... I don't get you.

Anyway, to be relevant, Doors CS 7 is coming up on six months late now, right?

I'm not a proud supporter of Vista - all I've ever said is that it is better than XP (which it is in many very important, not GUI related stuff - like security, superfetch, etc... )

That said, Vista being flashy is different from DCS being flashy. PCs have a ton of spare GPU power and hard drive space to waste on being flashy. TI-83/84s don't. I also love Compiz, which is nothing but flash.

That's not what he's saying. Calculators aren't meant to be mouse driven. Instead your suppose to navigate menu's with arrow keys, or corresponding numbers, to get where you wish to go. Where as 'Vista' is clearly a mouse driven system.

Using the mouse on DCS is slow, sure it's adjustable but it's still slow. Try to navigate Vista using your keyboard.

People don't complain about the mouse on a calc because it IS flashy and new. If one were to make a shell on Vista that used only the keyboard they'd get numerous complaints about usability, about being slow to find your way around.

In my opinion, a good Shell doesn't add on to the OS, it increases the usability. Take MirageOS: it's menu based, has sub-directories and other features that you can't access through the "normal" TIOS. DCS offers these same things, plus some additional features that the TIOS doesn't natively support (such as gCn).

DCS's mouse is basically a cool, wanted but rather cumbersome feature.

Hahahaha, nice one.

I actually don't know what gCn is, I just keep hereing about it. Something Calc Network? The wiki has nothing

Edit: I rememberd! Global Calculator Network. So I know what is now, but what exactly is it suppose to do?

Well, to my great embarrassment, it seems that only I can actually make Cn2 function properly between real hardware calculators, so gCn, which is meant to make the internet transparent to calculators so things like link-cable 2-person games can be played across the world, doesn't actually function properly at the moment. Of course I'd be most in favor of getting it to work for the cool factor of it, but if people feel it would be a waste of time, I'm willing to consider dropping it entirely.

Ah. The hard part about getting the calc to recognize other calulators over the web, is you'd need a middle man. Make a computer based middle-man that essentially fools your calculator it's another calculator.

Your Calculator A, Guy in China is Calculator B, computer is Calc C(1, 2):

A sends variables to C1, and C1 sends those variables to C2 which inturn sends those variables to B. And vica versa. The only catch is creating a lobby where users broadcast what game they are playing. Perhaps all gCn compatible games have unique number, which gets registered here on Cemetech. The variable is saved to LGCN which is sent to C. C reads this value and displays the game's availability in the lobby.

But then you have people who mod games so two of the same games may be incompatible due to user-end modding.

That's my take on a gCN revilement(?)~

Yes. Duh. That is what I planned. Unfortunately, as elfprince and Kllrnohj discovered when they were helping me to plan it out, TI's GraphLink cable is only capable of sending data in TI's utterly fail transfer protocol, and cannot be made to manually set lines high and low to implement one's own protocol. Therefore, the only possibilities are a custom cable of some sort or a direct, embedded TCP bridging hardware solution.

Oh. I thought it was too obvious D:

By the way, my laughing was just in response to him saying that gCn was offered. Not at the idea in general. I think it'd definitely be cool if it got off the ground.

I got that, it made sense. Thanks for the clarification though.

Your other option is to use TI's protocol, which I think would work well enough. It wouldn't be transparent and you can't use cn2 and gcn at the same time, but I don't really think anyone would.

how hard would the custom TCP solution be?

I wouldn't be surprised if there was already a solution that could be modified to work fairly quickly.

What will TCP get you? You are still stuck with the hardware connection problem. The protocol at this point is irrelevant if you don't want to use TI's, since there isn't any connection available then.

as in....2.5mm serial cable on one end, cat-5 on the other, with a chip in the middle to turn CN2 packets into TCP packets.

Precisely. That is what the computer was supposed to be doing anyway, so it's just subtracting a lot of extraneous hardware from the middle.

i dont know if someone already said this (i stopped reading after 2.5 pages, to long) but i think that when you are finished executing a program the menu should go back to exactly where you were when you started the program, instead of going back to the top.

also one of my favorite games (phoenix) crashed in doors the other day and flipped my screen. i know this is probably not your fault but i was just wondering if you new why it would happen.

Except the problem is the CHIP IN THE MIDDLE. *THAT* was where things got stuck, not on protocol. So TCP still won't help at all with the actual problem.