I will NOT be buying one.

Same...The real question is: Do you actually NEED it? I am all for the latest and coolest but this is taking it to the extreme. No added functions math it mathematically better than the regular 89. And I am not exactly strapped for RAM.

Same here... Is there any point? You can buy a regular TI-89 for $125 so why buy an ugly calculator that only has more archive and an added USB port, that costs $25 dollars more?

The 89T is basically an 89 with the memory of a Voyage 200, no extra features, accept for apps.

"And I am not exactly strapped for RAM"

I am... I store EVERYTHING on my calculator. Since we're always taking long trips to visit relatives and such, I store loads and loads of text files on my calc to read while I'm away from my computer, along with the latest games (like excitebike :-D). My memory's usually very close to being full, so the TI-89Ti wouldn't be a bad idea... though I don't think I'll be trading my TI-89 in, and I don't exactly have $135 to spare, so I probably won't get it. I certainly wouldn't mind having one, though. :)

Why not convert the text files to ebooks?

I like to edit my files.

You definitely need a V200... (I am obsessed with V200s after I bought mine)

I have a v200. I still prefer my 86.

I was very much hoping that the Titanium would have added math capabilities, specifically:

3D graphing - sure we can do surfaces, i.e. real valued functions of two variables. Why the heck not vector valued functions of a single one? I'm talking 3D parametric curves, folks, like the popular helix used to study unit tangents, normals, and binormals and whatnot. Who's with me on this one?

Vectors in general - TI really dropped the ball on this one too. E.g. What's the length of some vector that exists in more than two dimensions? Sure I can write a program to handle this sort of thing, I just shouldn't have to. I'd also propose a method for extracting elements out of a vector. (getElement(), like getNum() or getDenom() or somesuch)

Anyone else with such ideas for real modifications, practicle ones? I frankly won't pay for a lexus when my toyota drives just as nice.

>What's the length of some vector that exists in more than two dimensions?

norm([x1,x2,x3,...])

>I'd also propose a method for extracting elements out of a vector.

vector[1,i] takes the ith element of a line vector, vector[i,1] takes the ith element of a column vector.

I doubt I will need one. I already have 2 Ti-89s, having a third one would be kinda over kill.

And now must return to work...

Actually, Target has had the TI 89 Titanium in stock for several weeks now. I saw it when I was looking at calculators a couple of weeks ago, at 2 differend targets!

really?

Maybe its out in only some Target stores...I live on the west coast, and I couldnt find it at Target...

MUHAHAHA...I get a 10% discount since I work at TARGET. Too bad I am not ging to buy one :-) I wonder if I could pawn off my discount code to ayone? :-)

Hey, does anyone who owns one want to write a review on my website? Go to paulygon.org/index.php (above URL) and you should be able to figure out how to submit a review. It would be really great if someone would do that, even though the site is under construction, I'm trying to get as much content and community as possible for the kickoff date, July 1.

If anybody else has one of the following calculators: TI-83+SE, TI-84+, TI-84+SE, TI-86, TI-89, TI-92+, or Voyage 200, I need reviews for those too. Your contributions would be much appreciated.

I'm doing V200...

Cool! Let me know if you have any problems. Keep in mind that the articles and reviews pages are non-existant, but you can still add to my database through the "Contribute" link.

Everyone is comparing all the high end calculators and such, but what is difference between the TI-84+SE and the TI-89T. It seems that from what I've read that the TI-84+SE is faster but uses a z80 wheras the TI-89T is slower but is a 68k calc. Is this correct and is there more?

With all the problems that I'm starting to see with lack of new features and a useless artistic touch coming from TI, I'm starting to think that maybe the HP49g+ would be better. The biggest problem I have with that right now is that I've read it uses emulated software (which hurts that faster processor) and I don't think there is a site even close to half as good as this one for finding support for programming along with programs and apps to download. Is the HP49g+ allowed on tests? I don't think I've seen either way about that subject. Yes I know you would have to cover the IR, but would there be anything else that would make it an illegal calc?

<< but what is difference between the TI-84+SE and the TI-89T >>
This thing called a Computer Algebra System.

<< It seems that from what I've read that the TI-84+SE is faster but uses a z80 wheras the TI-89T is slower but is a 68k calc. Is this correct and is there more? >>
The 84+SE is 15MHz and the 89Ti 12MHz yes, but their processors are different types. The 84 has a z80 and the 89 an M68k, and the 89 is faster (supposedly) because of it).

But maybe someone else should explain the details...

<< Is the HP49g+ allowed on tests? >>
Certain ones, yes.

<< Yes I know you would have to cover the IR, but would there be anything else that would make it an illegal calc? >>
Just the usual - CAS, symbolic manipulation, stuff like that.

<<But maybe someone else should explain the details...>>

if you go a couple of pages back, Patrick Davidson explains the processor differences pretty well.

>>and I don't think there is a site even close to half as good as this one for finding support for programming along with programs and apps to download
Hello... HPcalc.org

Thanks for the info. I tried searching once and came up with a lot of junk. I'll search that site before I decide which calc I like.

By the way, thank you all who replied. It has helped me understand the differences better. Just one more question: Why on earth did TI want to screw around with a perfectly good keyboard? I don't think there was any point to adding some curves and connecting the up/down arrows.

My comment still stands. By far, that is the best HP site I've seen, but it still doesn't come close to this one. Also, I don't even see much mention of the HP49g+ there.

thats partically because hpcalc.org is only run by 1 guy, who doesn't seem interested in updating the site anymore.

At any rate most applications written for the 49g will still run. There are alot of science and engineering programs.

I've heard that HP have not given out any information on using the ARM cpu, so no games are out for it. That sucks.

The TI 89 is, IMHO, superior to the TI 83+/84+ in almost every way: User-defined functions, native (built-in) support for flickerless greyscale, more modern and capable CPU, more and better math functions, the presence of a CAS, etc. I like the ability to key in function names, programs, etc. directly from the home screen, without having to go through menus or tokens.

Anything you are able to do on the TI 89, you can learn to do on the HP 49g/g+ too. Of course, this assertion has some minor exceptions, such as certain symbolic integrations, but you can get around most of these obstacles if you have an understanding of the problem, and supply the calculator with an appropriate substitution. However, if you're aready familiar with the TI family, you may not be comforatble with the HP 49, specifically with its programming language and the "feel" of its keyboard -- not as squishy as TI's.

Taken from HP's website, the HP49g+ (and the 48gii, its little brother without flash ROM) is permitted for use on SAT I, SAT II Math IC/IIC, PSAT/NMSQT, AP Calculus, AP Statistics, AP Chemistry, AP Physics.

Superior in (almost) every way.

I second that.

The 89T is much faster. For example, the 89 can emulate a spectrum (which uses the same 6mhz z80 processor as the 83/84)

comparing the speed in mhz between these two processors is like comparing apples and oranges. The z80 uses a risc instruction set while the m68k uses a cisc instruction set. the 68k processor has a 16 bit bus, the z80 processor has an 8 bit bus... so the 68k processor is able to move 2 times more data across the bus per clock cycle than the z80.

Too bad TI didn't use a 6502 or a 6809 instead of a Z80.