>>There are no comments on this article yet. Why don't you add one?

OK, I'll add one.

This seems to be the first TI-85 program in a very long time.

Why is the TI-85 so loved, did I missed something?

It isn't. It's old and obsolete to most people.

Check the "About" section. You might find something that will hint as to why some people love the 85.

Dude, I have an old 85, and the screen does't work right. I'd take my 89 over an 85 any day.

If you didn't take your 89 over ANY calculator any day, I'd be surprised. Unless they eventually come out with a better calc...BTW, by 89 I am including the titanium edition, so no one reply with "they DO have a better one"...I'm not oblivious. To get BACK on topic, I think these games are going to be pretty cool. Although I don't really play games on my 83+ (because of the horrible resolution in comparison to the 89) I may just check this one out (and perhaps vote for it as POTY now that it is featured).

Not to start a flame war, but apart from games, my HP-49G is a better calculator than the TI-89. You don't lose your memory when it crashes, it has a standard serial port, you can develop assembly and RPL software on the calculator, it has RPN mode, it has an excellent equation editor, and the maths features are better (I'm an electrical engineer, so I use it a lot for maths).

From what I've seen and read about the HP49, you're right, it is superior to any TI product, in some areas.

It's half-undocumented and beeps at you and displays a nondescript sarcastic message in the third-person when you do something right and it doesn't work. It's impossible to use and counterintuitive. It's fragile. It can't be programmed properly. It's slow. What's better than a TI-89Ti? Whatever your answer to that is, consider whether it could be done aftermarket on a TI-89Ti.

"It's half-undocumented"

So 800+ pages of online documentation + 200 page manual + docs on hpcalc.org isn't enough for you?

"and beeps at you"

If you made a mistake. You can turn the beep off easily if you want.

"and displays a nondescript sarcastic message in the third-person when you do something right and it doesn't work."

Sure, sure. I'm interested in what error message is in the third person.

"It's impossible to use and counterintuitive."

A little more difficult to use, perhaps, but certainly not impossible.

"It can't be programmed properly. "

You don't like HP-Basic, User-RPL, Sys-RPL, Saturn Asm, ARM Asm, or C? Wow, you're hard to please.

"It's slow."

The HP49g+ can be overclocked to 200MHz, and it normally operates at 75MHz. Thats a tad faster then the < 20MHz chip in the TI89. Even after the emulation is considered, the HP49g+ is still faster then the TI89 for most areas. And new programs are much, much faster, as they don't use emulation.

"What's better than a TI-89Ti? Whatever your answer to that is, consider whether it could be done aftermarket on a TI-89Ti."

I like the TI-89. Its a great calculator. But don't try and spread opinion as fact.

Whenever I attempt to use it, it sits there for 5 minutes until I figure out that it wants the key to be pressed harder, at which point I mash the thing, which promts a beep and a sarcastic message.

How is the average user even supposed to find the documentation?!

So this third-person message is displayed whether I make a mistake or not? What brilliant feature does that perform?

Despite all this, you still say it's easy to use.

>>You don't like HP-Basic, User-RPL, Sys-RPL, Saturn Asm, ARM Asm, or C

I program in ASM and C. Look in my profile. However, I can't make it do anything and and the TI-89Ti at least works properly. Here's some more things I can't find because they're undocumented: the computer-to-calculator cable, a compiler, an assembler, and any bloody documentation of any of the aforementioned items. You don't like TI-BASIC, MCL, Moka, Sierra C, TIGCC C, MC68000 ASM, or Exec Hex? Wow, you're hard to please.

I am not spreading opinions. I am spreading my personal experiences with this unusable plastic doorstop.

I agree with your statement regarding the "user-friendliness" of the TI-89 and the TI-89Ti over any of HP's calculators, but I must state that an Advanced RISC Machine (ARM) processor is superior to the MC68000 chip in many ways. The only fault I find with it is that MC68000 assembly made more sense to me than the ARM assembly dialect. However, because I program in C for both chips (I program for Palm OS--Palm devices runnning on Palm OS 4.1.3 or lower use variants of the MC68000, and devices running on Palm OS 5 or higher use either an ARM or a Pentium Xscale), this drawback does not affect my opinion on the ARM chip.

I agree. However, the AMS and associated apps and programs are much better written than HP versions, as well as the actual computer hardware minus the CPU (case in point:my TI-83 Plus was run over by a car). It's amazing what the TI people have done with the MC68000.

(See the URL). that is with the 49g, which has a 4MHz saturn processor. Of course this comparision is way out of date.

I just got done saying that the 49G+ processor was better than the MC68000.

lin k

-W-

(remove spaces from the URL's)

"How is the average user even supposed to find the documentation?!"

You could always try reading the manual that comes with it, or try putting the CD that came with it in the drive? Let me help you out:

http://h10025.www1.hp.com /ewfrf/wc/manualCategory?
product=351775 &lc=en&cc=us &dlc=en&dest_page= product&

http://www.hp.com/ calculators/graphing/ 49gplus/educators.html

"Here's some more things I can't find because they're undocumented: the computer-to-calculator cable,"

eh? This comes with it.

"a compiler, an assembler, and any bloody documentation of any of the aforementioned items."

A sysRPL compiler and assembler is actually built into the ROM. It just needs a special key combination to activate it, as the typical user would just crash their calculator trying to use it. See http://alpage.ath.cx/ hptute/lib256.htm for a quick intro, or http://www.hpcalc.org /hp49/docs/ programming/masddocs.zip for some docs. All of this could be found by searching the web or www.hpcalc.org. As for C, HPGCC (http://hpgcc. sourceforge.net) will be good when its finished.

"You don't like TI-BASIC, MCL, Moka, Sierra C, TIGCC C, MC68000 ASM, or Exec Hex? Wow, you're hard to please."

You seem to think I am trying to make this a competition. I'm not. I don't know Motorola ASM, but I'm not calling the TI89 a pile of junk because of it am I?

The average user has trouble figuring out the basics at the beginning and generally doesn't 'speak computers.' Case in point:my dad. He can't comprehend the manual, he can't figure out how to use it without the manual, and has never heard of hpcalc.org, as well as knowing so little about computers as being unable to navigate to or use hpcalc.org if he knew about it.

BTW, about my dad:retired engineer, programs well in FORTRAN. He's not untrained but is an average user.

This is exactly what I didn't want to happen. A flame war. I never knocked the TI-89. It's fine for what it does, but it isn't the calculator for me. You strike me as very ignorant, as it seems you've made no effort to learn to use the HP-49, but have immediately written it off as useless.

I tried to use it for weeks and I couldn't, whereas I picked up a TI-92 Plus at an Office Depot and immediately was able to use it.

But it won't lower your "Jack Kilby (inventor of the IC, worked for TI) number".

I don't lose my memory on my TI-89 when it crashes either. (Because I archive everything) Plus, you _CAN_ make assembly programs on the TI-89, but it's much easier to use the computer. There are programs to use RPN mode (though I'd never use it), and if you mean by "equation editor" that it can solve equations and all that, the TI-89 has a solve() function which works pretty well. It can't do horribly advanced things, but it's still very handy. However, the HP-49G+ is much faster than the TI-89, IIRC. But then again, most people prefer the TI-89's interface. It's all a matter of preference. Lots of people think the TI-89 is better, and lots of other people think the HP-49G+ is better. It really comes down to what you use the calculator for. And in your case, engineering, I think I'd have to say the HP calc would be better, but for getting through high school (and college, I guess, depending on what you do) and, of course, for entertainment purposes (I take my TI-89 everywhere with me), then I'd go for the 89. :) They're both good calcs, in my opinion.

I think he means "like the TI App EQW, but free" kind of equation editor.

Yes, but I don't have to archive and I still don't lose anything after a crash. And I have built-in assemblers and compilers. I use RPN all the time. When you're dealing with some kinds of maths, it saves a lot of time. I'm sure the TI-89 is great, but it definitely isn't an engineers calculator.

BTW, in Australia, any calculator with algebraic capabilities is banned in high school, so I got through with my trusty TI-82. I didn't get my HP-49 until 3rd year of university, when I finally got sick of solving power electronics equations. lol

>>>Not to start a flame war, but<<<
Too late. You just pissed off a bunch of 89 enthusiasts.

Talk about wierd: I was in Staples today and checked out the prices of the new TI calcs:
The TI84+SE costs CDN$199.99 (down from $230 last month).
The TI89ti costs CDN$195.99 (down from $250 last month).

Why would the less advanced machine cost more?

The TI-83+ (SE) and the TI-89 were fine before the release of the TI-84+ and the TI-89Ti, and most everyone knows this. There is no incentive for many people to purchase a TI-84+ as an upgrade from their TI-83+, and there is even less of an incentive for others to upgrade their TI-89 to a TI-89Ti. Because demand is low, and the supply is high, the price will low. Because there is less demand for the TI-89Ti than for the TI-84+, the TI-89Ti's price is lower.

Another question, what's with the new TI-84+ and the TI-89Ti? Were they the result of TI attempting to fix that which isn't broken?

lol go to Wal-Mart. the Titanium is $150 there.

Goto Ebay you can get a voyage 200 for $150 to $190
Also a ti-92+ for about 100-150
and ive seen a few ti-89s on there for 80 to 175

Sorry to tell you this, but I'm sure my Voyage 200 beats both the hp calc, AND the ti89, untill ti comes out with a new calc the voyage 200 is obviously better

Where in the "About" section?

Look at the 5x2 menu thingy at the top. (Basics, Archives, Community, Services, ...) It's on the bottom row in the middle. ;-)

But I already answered it for you in my post below. :) (Yay for Magnus)

>>Look at the 5x2 menu thingy at the top. (Basics, Archives, Community, Services, ...) It's on the bottom row in the middle. ;-)

Where *in* not *is*

Oops :) Hehe, stupid me. Actually, I don't think that's in the About section. I know it's in the Basics section, though. Basics > Calculators > TI-85. But you knew that already. Heh *feels stupid*

But hey, if it weren't for the TI-85 and ZShell, we wouldn't have ASM on our calculators today! So it's historic. :-D

It's historic, but old and obsolete.

Heh, I agree with you there. It's even older than my TI-82!

Isn't the 85 almost the same as the 86 in capability?
If so, then I wouldn't call it worthless, becasue the 86 is not worthless.

(because)
That's what I get for not proofreading.

I never called it worthless.

It is not the same as the TI-86 by a long shot.

What's the difference? (besides the color of the screen)

Huge huge huge huge difference: 85 was an important calculator for the development of other calculators (ASM) but it's old and not so fun to use. 86 has no influence whatsoever on what newer calcs can do, but they're fun!

I don't want to get too off-topic and start another flame war, but the 86 really isn't far behind all the other calcs. It's definitely not as good as the 68K calcs, but then nothing *else* is either. Its only disadvantage, compared to the 83+ (which is the most advanced Z80 calc besides the 86), is that it doesn't have flash or as much memory total. In most other things, it's significantly better, with more advanced math functions, typable tokens, better menus, just more features in general.

But yes, they are fun like you said. :-)

We need a TI-86 Plus :)

YES! Great idea. Instead of TI making the stupid 84's they should have made a ti-86+. More memory and flash... Maybe even free apps!!! (not like people even use most of those)

This issue has been addressed here and on the TI Discussion Boards (Most likely at TICT HQ as well) many times. TI hates the TI-86, and calls the TI-83 an "improvement" over the TI-86, since it has more "intuitive" menus and is less expensive.

Of course, I still like the TI-86 much better than the 84+SE.

I'm going to stick with my trusty 83 Se (never leave home without one)

The TI-86's memory is paged, and such an upgrade would require more pages and would make the calculator slower.

Why would more pages make it slower? It would be slower if you use _more_ pages to access _more_ data, but that should be expected and accepted.

More pages make it slower if you try to access the last pages. My point is a TI-86+ wouldn't be an upgrade because it would be slower.

Uh...no...I don't think it has to "scroll" or anything...the page number you send to port 6 just selects the appropriate bank of RAM.

Well, the TI 83+/84+'s memory is pages as well, isn't it? I mean, there is a 16-bit address space on all Z80-based calculators, for a total of 64k of addressable locations, shared between RAM and (Flash) ROM. Obviously, there has to be some kind of paging in any calculator that has more then 64k of RAM+ROM.

They're logically isolated but not paged.

From the official TI-83+ SDK guide:

The TI-83 Plus uses a Z80 processor with a 64K byte logical address space. To provide
more than 64K bytes of physical RAM, this logical memory space is divided into four
16K byte pages (see Fig. 2.3). Physical memory is also divided into two 16K byte pages
(see Fig. 2.3), and a physical page is mapped into each logical page as it is needed.

... and, it explains how the first section of Z80 addresses (0x0000-0x3FFF) always points to ROM page 0, and the last section of Z80 addresses (0xC000-0xFFFF) always points to RAM page 0. The other two sections (0x4000-0x7FFF and 0x8000-0xBFFF) can be pointed to any of the ROM or RAM pages that may be required. Sounds like there is a memory controller unit in there, and it sounds like paging to me.

... it goes on to say,
The TI-83 Plus Silver Edition Flash ROM is composed of 2048K (2M) bytes divided into 128
pages, each of which is 16K bytes in size. The structure is generally the same as the TI-83
Plus except for the inclusion of 96 additional 16K pages (24 additional 64K sectors).

Also on the 83+ SE and both 84s, there are 7 ram pages which can be mapped to $c000-$ffff.

Yes, they are paged!!!! Otherwise, you couldn't get more than 64K of memory TOTAL, including ROM!!! The Z80 has 16-bit addressing.

I thought that it was in reference to the RAM being one page and the FLASH being another, which is wrong.

Just as the 83+'s memory is paged. They both use Z80, which only has 64k address space.

typable tokens!! That has got to be the single most useful thing I could think of in a calculator. If I don't remember which menu a command is located in, and I don't want to waste the time going through all the menus or the catalog, I can just type in the command (ir variable, etc.) I want and be done with it. TI89/HPxx Forever!!

In fact, I would gladly give up an app slot or two if it would allow TI to include typable token support in its next OS release for the 83+/84+

TI-86 has 128k memory (vs 32k). TI-86 has built-in assembly support. TI-86 has active matrix screen (vs hard-to-read passive matrix). TI-86 has custom font support. TI-86 has bigger ROM and more features in general.

The TI-86's built-in assembly support (using the AsmProg command) helped me a lot while I was learning Z80 assembly language. I wrote programs directly in hex to draw little pictures on the screen (I found the screen memory myself by writing data to random places in RAM :).

I crashed my calculator countless times during that time, and many times the screen went all wonky and stuff like that. It was pretty cool.

Ah, those were the days. :-)

I seriously hope that ROM was a typo of RAM. If not, then I just don't know what to say.

-W-

I don't know about the ROM, but the 86 has about 3x the RAM of the 85.

Why wouldn't you know what to say? Both calculators obviously have ROM, otherwise the calcs would crash unrecoverably every time you accidentally let the batteries run out. It stands to reason that TI might put more features in the 86 than it did in the 85, so it would require a larger ROM to hold those new features.

The TI-85 has 128K of ROM, and the TI-86 has 256K of ROM. TI seems to have run out of ideas while making the TI-86 ROM as only about 194K of that ROM is used, with the remaining 62K full of huge blocks of $FF over and over.

From ticalc's hardware section

"The TI-85....was the first TI calculator to have a link port and assembly programming capability (through an unintentional loophole)."

Of course everyone likes it, first ASM.

But now they all have it (except for TI-80 and 81). It's like saying that the COLOSSUS is revered for its power and amazing abilities as well as its relevance to solving today's problems. It's not like it wasn't historic, it's just obsolete now.

On IRC, eh? Why doesn't someone make sometype of IRC program for calculator someday? (Yes, connected to some type of dial up modem.)

That was _way_ too many "some"s and too many "type"s.

What IS ti's IRC channel, anyways? I know it's #tcpa, but what server?

Try the efnet network.

Ahh, I'd been wondering what server #tcpa was on for a long time. So, irc.efnet.org, perhaps?

A "map" of a EFnet servers... :)
http://map.efnet.info/index.php
?server=servercentral

Or, If you prefer, here is the "list"
http://www.efnet.info/?module=servers

Of course, if you don't care what server you connect to on EFnet, you can just connect to irc.efnet.net, and it will direct you to a randomly selected server. However, you may have to try several times depending on what servers you are allowed/klined on, and whether or not you have identd installed. In the perfect scenario, of course, you should get on in the first try without too much of a hassle.