Yay, maybe they fixed the bug where the 83+ OS uses Y-var when using Line()
If you use Y in a loop where Y is changing and repeatedly printing lines on the screen then the Var will stay the same. Atleast that happened to a program I made until I used V instead of Y. Grr @ TI, "You said you could use any var!"

Oh, staying on topic: I think the 83+SE are banned in formal exams here because of it's memory capabilities.
Anyone know the routine to recover memory that's erased? Hex please.

I know it involves a TSR that hides variables when the OS tries to delete them.

I think there was a routine to recover memory though. Not sure on the extent of it but Omnicalc has it....

There is a program called "Archive recovery" Just makesure that there is no garbage collect. Also, it only recovers the ROM.

-W-

Omnicalc uses the extra RAM in the SE (which is never used by TIOS) to store a backup of your RAM. If TIOS decides to reset your RAM, Omnicalc's RestoreMem() function will restore its backup, thus recovering the contents of your RAM memory.

Dan E. Made a program to recover data when deleted directly from the archive. Deleteing from the archive apparently only deletes the VAT entry. This program looks for the actual program data stored elsewhere and recovers. On the note of using Omnicalc; Omnicalc doesnt exactly "recover" data. It simply copies the ram to the extra 24k (not available to the normal user, but it does exist) and copies back when RestoreMem() is called.

I might end this line of conversation, the VACC might not know of this and just ban them on the basis that they're better than the standard 83+ and would dissadvantage others.

Except ofcourse that SE's aren't "better" than regular 83+'s, not in any way that could give you an unfair advantage on tests at least.

Actually, isn't the extra RAM much greater than 24k. I thought it was at least 32k or as much as 96k (I can't seem to remember which). I read something somewhere about the asm ports that control the extra RAM and found that there were pages that are not being used. With each page being 16k, there would at have to be 32k extra for a total of 64k on the SE.

I only have the old 83+, so I didn't really pay attention to all the extra RAM that the SE had; however, if the extra RAM is 96k*, then someone needs to write an asm file manager that can allow people to back up even more programs the the extra RAM.

*I can't remember if the SE has 4 or 8 pages of RAM. I know the old 83+ has only 2, so by multiplying by 16k, the calculators would have

83+ 32k
83+SE (if 4 pages) 64k
83+SE (if 8 pages) 128k

I don't know, but maybe the 84 series has more RAM, and no one has been told yet (but it's doubtful). TI didn't let us know about the increase with the SE, so why would they change now about what they let us know.

Now *that* is interesting. My major complaint about the 83+ series of calculators has always been that its RAM is too small. (Well, that and the whole 8K asm program limit.) If there were a systematic way of accessing those extra pages of RAM, then you could use them for archiving extra data/programs.

You might also be able to use it to extend the effective side of runnable asm programs to a full 16K.

Imagine if you will: The 83+SE will only allow ASM programs to be run if the instructions are being fetched from a certain page in memory. Is the protection based on the address being sent out of the CPU, or on the address being received by the RAM chip?

If it is based on the address received by the RAM chip, then you're sunk. But, if it is based on the address being supplied by the CPU, then there is hope. You could use a Flash APP to switch a new RAM page in, which happens to contain an ASM program starting at address 0000. Jump to address 0000, and the ASM program will run, with a full 16K to play with before risking triggering the HW reset.

The 83+ SE has a 128k RAM chip. (So do the 84+ and SE.) It is mapped to logical pages 80-87. Of those eight pages, four are executable (81, 83, 85, and 87.)

Only two of those pages -- 80 and 81 -- are ever touched by TIOS. Thus all four models have the exact same amount of user memory.

If you want to, you can eat three of the four odd RAM pages and get a full 48k of executable RAM swapped at once. You'll be overwriting Omnicalc backup and VC, though, and people won't like that.

Anything new in 83+ 1.18 OS ?
Other than the vague description: Improved CBL/CBR & Keyboard Support.

I missed 1.17.. what happened then?

I think they're going to go up by .02 now. =P
next OS should be 1.2y (for Y bug fix) *hint*

Nah, don't worry about that. Just take it as a fact that when using graphs or graphing functions, the calculator will use the X and Y variables and their values will be changed. Think of them as "reserved" variables and don't use them in programs where you graph stuff.

And I doubt that they skipped one. They probably HAD a 1.17 OS and just didn't have it out for very long.

Or they discovered a critical bug right before launch, but some did have it. so they put 18 out so that there was no confusion.

-W-

are there any compatibility issues with the new OS?

I thought it would be something like that. I know it seems like they skipped some on the TI-89 because there are certain ROMs that are really hard to find, but I looked it up and apparently, they didn't skip any, they just released them for a very short time.

>> the calculator will use the X and Y variables

That;s why you can't archive them.

>> They probably HAD a 1.17 OS and just didn't have it out for very long.

One of my friends recently bought a 83+ that came with 1.17.

Actually Michael just informed me that there were some 83+'s sold with version 1.17 but they never made it available for download on their site. You might be able to ask them for a copy in an e-mail.

Yeah, my sister got a Blue regular 83+ recentaly with OS 1.17
Don't know what I did though...

hmmmm.... i to noticed that the previous update was 1.16 and it also said it fixed the same thing as the new one..... kinda strange. Maybe it fixes something other than what they are saying.... any ideas?

Adam

Two stages of improvement. For example, 1.16 could introduce basic support and 1.17 could make the external and internal keyboards functionally the same.

That they didn't bother to update the description is a far more likely explanation.

jsp generated page, reference to 1.18 xml name whilst page hasn't been changed in a few months. =P

I believe the OS download page's title still said 1.16 (even though it was changed everywhere else to 1.18).

It's probably just that TI didn't change it (although I have yet to look closely at the OS...had to swap batteries with my 89 to send it.)

I think that it runs faster because I actually put the new OS today in the morning and it seriously felt faster (...or maybe im hi and I forgot that it RAM cleard and that usually makes it go faster. Oh well.)
>hey faceplates are cool but as we all know its just to make money. Why the heck do we need to custimize our graphing calculators. A kickstand is cool because its actually somewhat useful. Go TI because the 84+ and the 89ti are awsome calcs.

>> Go TI because the 84+ and the 89ti are awsome calcs.

I dunno about that.. all they did was add memory and a USB port. Seems to me they're lazy.

As for the new OS, I find it strange that the date says Aug.25, 2004. Don't they usually spend a month or two testing it before it comes out..

Yes, they didn't add much to them, but that doesn't mean that they're not worth buying. They're still very good calculators. All TI needs to do is come up with some more practical ideas for your calculator. Not fancy coloring things to make it look "pretty."

that might be the problem I mean what more can you want out of an 89 besides size which they did not do.

I wouldn't want the calculator to get any bigger. If you want physical size, go for a TI-92+ or a V200. I like being able to fit the calculator in my pocket. Besides, it's not considered to be a computer (no QWERTY), so you can use it for many more things.

what I was saying is the only thing that ti could do to improve the 89 would be to shrink it, but I think that the titanium is bigger

It's bigger? I thought they were the same size. Well, it's shaped a bit differently...

it feels bigger, to me, I could be wrong but I think it is.

Are you allowed to use a calculator with a DOVAK (I probably misspelled that) keyboard on the SATs?

No DVORAK keyboards, either.