Login [Register]
Don't have an account? Register now to chat, post, use our tools, and much more.
I have no problem with TI's profits increasing, as long as it's good for students, teachers, and us. Smile And as long as they continue to recognize the mutual assistance that they and the community can provide for each other. I'm hopeful that we may finally be moving out of the shadow of the ticalc.org CD incident.
KermMartian wrote:
I'm hopeful that we may finally be moving out of the shadow of the ticalc.org CD incident.


Once burned, twice shy, as the saying goes.
elfprince13 wrote:
KermMartian wrote:
I'm hopeful that we may finally be moving out of the shadow of the ticalc.org CD incident.


Once burned, twice shy, as the saying goes.
Well sure, I certainly understand where they're coming from. With how many customers they probably lost from that incident versus the thousands if not millions of customers we have engaged over the years, though, I would certainly think that there's a good opportunity for us to accelerate the fence-mending. Smile

Getting back on-topic: the issue of the screen size versus the scale of memory that we usually deal with is bugging me. With 16-bit pixels, we'd need a whopping 153KB of memory per image, or even for the gbuf. With 8-bit pixels, it's 77KB, and even with 3-bit (8-color) images, it's 29KB.
Well, going by the original photo, it looks like the image on the graph screen is around 256 pixels wide (and definitely not as tall as the screen either), which could likely be due to memory concerns.
KermMartian wrote:
Getting back on-topic: the issue of the screen size versus the scale of memory that we usually deal with is bugging me. With 16-bit pixels, we'd need a whopping 153KB of memory per image, or even for the gbuf. With 8-bit pixels, it's 77KB, and even with 3-bit (8-color) images, it's 29KB.

I would assume that the 84 Plus C would contain more memory along with a faster processor to deal with this problem. Hopefully that doesn't mean an underlying architecture that we aren't familiar with, but if TI wants to support legacy programs, it needs to have the familiar architecture in place (like how the Game Boy Advance let its z80 coprocessor run Game Boy Color games). My guess is that our old stuff will still work, but we'll need to learn the new system to work in color.
Compynerd: I suspect you're entirely right about that.
Calc84maniac: Yeah, I noticed that too; I'm not sure what I think about that.
Everyone: Lucas from TechPoweredMath has some additional details about the TI-84+CSE's operating system and how the Plus C relates to the Nspire line. We'll be breaking the story as soon as details are available.
elfprince13 wrote:
KermMartian wrote:
I'm hopeful that we may finally be moving out of the shadow of the ticalc.org CD incident.


Once burned, twice shy, as the saying goes.


Yeah. I'm pretty sure Ti would not be supportive of another one of those, especially considering the screening process they used on it and all.

Pretty much, what they did when it came to screening it was they asked programmers to opt-in their programs for inclusion on the CD. They asked that you not submit anything offensive or copywritten onto the disk. That's why when I opted in, I excluded FF7 and the Punisher games but the rest of my programs are on it. Other Programmers didn't read (or cared) so they added their entire collection to the disk. Porn, Copyrights and all.

I'd post an ISO of that disk, but I'm not going to break copyright over a recalled disk. All it really was was a customized ticalc.org archive site on CD.

Back on topic. I would like to see Ti engage us programmers more when it comes to the ti-84c. If they did that before they released the Nspire it might have been a good calc out of the box instead of a glorified powerpoint presenter that it originally was.
We have gotten more details about the TI-84 Plus C. Please consider continuing the discussion in that article's discussion topic.
TI gave me a new image :




Edit : meh, why doesn't the forum recognizes TI-Planet's gallery direct links Razz
Sooooo.... who took the photo and how did they get one?
plus what ive read its gonna be something like for output in the format
output(1,18,"here
or
pixle-on(320,100
???just a guess to start out make a copy of all the programs you have now and convert them befor they come out so theres no waiting time befor peoples have games etc.
That's an excellent question. If you read the original article, we know of at least two students, one Dutch and one American, who have used these new calculators in class. I can't give many details, but I may be able to disseminate information on some of the TI-BASIC changes before the official release, and if there are new tokens, I will be working hard to try to get them into SourceCoder.
Pixel-On(XXX,YYY,#Color?
LuxenD wrote:
Pixel-On(XXX,YYY,#Color?
Very possibly, but again, we don't have confirmation on that yet. What I did just get confirmation on is the memory of this device: 3.5MB of archive, and 21KB of RAM available to users.
lots of archive, tiny amount of RAM for pictures and stuff...
KermMartian wrote:
LuxenD wrote:
Pixel-On(XXX,YYY,#Color?
Very possibly, but again, we don't have confirmation on that yet. What I did just get confirmation on is the memory of this device: 3.5MB of archive, and 21KB of RAM available to users.


21KB RAM... well, let's just really hope that we can make our own APPs.
Let's hope! It didn't even occur to me until we started discussing keys a few days ago that freely-signed Apps might be in jeopardy, but I really hope that they're not. My memory information above comes from a TI source that wishes to remain anonymous, by the way. They're not willing to reveal processor information yet, but do you guys have any other details you'd like me to ask about? It sounds like the (new/change) TI-BASIC commands for the screen are of a concern to everyone, for one thing.
if they lock apps out, how would you make Doors CS?
LuxenD wrote:
if they lock apps out, how would you make Doors CS?
Well, back in the day you had to submit apps to TI for final signing, a sort of approval. That's a possibility, I suppose, although remember that TI has made no noises about this sort of thing.
wow...
easy way for them to filter those they dont like. why'd they stop?
For the TI-Z80 series, they once shared the key (blunder or deliberate action, I couldn't tell), and development of FlashApps for the 83+ family blossomed.

For the TI-68k series, FlashApps were never that popular, as TI-68k ASM programs had much less in the way of effective restrictions (especially about size) than on the TI-Z80 series, TI-68k calcs have much more RAM than TI-Z80 calcs, and TI's programming environment and tools sucked a lot.
FlashApps enabled extra-large programs without having to load them to RAM (piece by piece, if necessary), but the number of such programs was quite limited, after all.
At some point, TI stopped replying to FlashApp signing requests, which prevented updates to e.g. the GTC on-calc C compiler. That led to the Flashappy OS patch for killing the signature validation, a while before the factorization of all of the TI-Z80 and TI-68k OS & FlashApp RSA validation (public) keys and deducing the signing (private) keys.
  
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 7 of 8
» 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

 

Advertisement