the old method was better, but even more divisions should be inplace,in the basic programs.

Why are the 85 and 86 listed together? The 85 is far more similar to the 82 than the 86. Is it just because the number 85 is closer to the number 86? This doesn't make any since.

Even the 83 and 83+ are more similar to the 86 than the 85. I think each calculator should have it's own listing. If you are going to group them together, at least put them together right. The 82 is also very different from the 83 and 83+.

Why are they grouped as they are?

If you owned both the TI-85 and TI-86, you would know that they are pretty similar to eachother. In fact, a lot of TI-85 basic programs will run on the TI-86. It's also fairly easy to emulate TI-85 assembly programs on the TI-86 using a shell like Rascall or ASE. However, the TI-82 and TI-85 are not similar. The TI-82 and TI-83(+) models are much more use-friendly and the TI-85/86 models are "harder" to use because of the menus on the bottom of the screen. Even the keyboard layout suggests the 85/86 belong together and the 82/83 belong together.

However, I agree with you - they should be listed by calculuator and not by this stupid "category" stuff. They said the categories are only there to help you know what calculator the program is for. Kinda stupid.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the 86 have 128k of RAM (96k user available) while the 85 have only 28k. The 86 features built-in assembly language capabilities (including 3 commands dealing with assembly language programs). The 85, on the other hand, had to be hacked to run assembly on it. 85 asm programs must be ran through a shell, 86 asm doesn't. The 86 also uses an 83-style list and matrix editor.

You're right that the keyboard layout is very similar, with only minor changes in locations to accommodate extra features included in the 86.

Another thing, you can also run 82 programs on the 86 using ASE. I'm sure if someone would write a shell for it you could also run 83 programs on the 86 as well. This is because they all use a z80, hence their processors all have the same instruction set.

Why does having the menus on the bottom make them harder to use? Yes, it was a little different at first, but I now find it easier. You don't have the leave the screen your working with to access commands. Another advantage is that you don't have to access the menu for a command every time you want to use it. You can simply leave the menu open at the bottom.

pcflyer1

It doesn't matter what specs each calculator has. Each calc is different, so each one should have it's own category.

Also note the sizes of the screen on the TI-82 and TI-83 are the same, while the sizes of the screen on the TI-85 and TI-86 are the same.

Plus, the fact that TI-82 basic runs on the TI-83, and TI-85 basic runs on the TI-86. And the TI-85 and TI-86 both have the menus at the bottom of the screen, and the TI-82 and TI-83 don't.

I think the conclusion is pretty clear, the TI-82 and TI-83 are similar to eachother, so are the TI-85 and TI-86.

I actually own all 4 of those calculators, trust me, this is the correct way to think about it.

I agree. I think the menus on the 85 and 86 are MUCH easier to use, espescially when programming - Even more so becase you CAN'T type in commands on the 82-83+, but you can on the 85 through 92+, so the menus on the 86/85 aren't nesscisary for many things. Another thing is that both the 85 and original 82 are boxy, but all the rest are rounded (including the new 82 - I can't see the point in making 82s or 85s anymore, just get an 83/86 or 89!)
And _all_ basic programms on the TI-85, unless they use the print screen command, will run on the 86, and all basic programms on the 82 will run on the 83/83+.

Speaking of the 85, there wasn't a single program listed for it. All the ones in that section were 86 progs. What's up with that? I know there haven't been many 85 programs released but I'd like to at least have the opportunity to vote on something I've actually tried.

Maybe none of the file archivers own a TI-85...

Hey everyone, is there any place where I can get rom version 1.0 for the 89? Is it possible to send it from your calculator if you have it? Please e-mail me and let me know. (Penguin667@aol.com)

I believe you should email scraft@ti.com with the serial number and other important info about your calc in the message body, requesting one.

~ferich a.k.a. itsferich

I'd just like to say that I think the new system is incredibly biased against BASIC programs. An exceptional BASIC program cannot fairly compete with an exceptional Asm program. BASIC and Asm are more different than the 82 and 85, but the 82 and 85 have different categories. I'm not saying that all the calculators should be in the same category, but BASIC and Asm need to be separated (even if that means one big BASIC category, like it used to be). Otherwise, no BASIC program will win against Asm side-scrollers (for example).

Sorry, I just realized you can vote for more than one in each section. But it could still deter people from BASIC programs.

You can vote for 5 programs total, across all categories. You could vote for 5 programs in the same category if you wanted to.

This new system is totally useless. I liked the idea (farther up the page) of having a "Feature It" button to have users determine the programs to be nominated, or programs should be nominated by number of votes in their catergory.
And the catergories should be CALCULATOR AND LANGUAGE SPECIFIC. There should be a catergory for 82 BASIC and 82 ASM, 83 BASIC, and 83 ASM, and so on. Not one catergory for 82-83.
Perhaps to "bring in the new millenium" ticalc should bring in a new system like what I'm describing. Reply to this if you agree, and maybe we can persuade them to realize that there is a difference between 92 BASIC and 89 ASM.

-Fil

I agree with Fil on this one. It should be separated into calculator and language specific catagories. This new system they are using now isn't very good.
Wells

It sucks.

~ferich

Way to put it bluntly. :)

I also like the "Feature It!" button idea, and I agree with you on separate categories for each platform, both BASIC and assembly. I also think that a person should be limited to two votes per calc only for calcs that he has, one for BASIC and one for assembly, according to their account information. This rules out emulators, both on-calc and vTI. That way, they vote for the best only, and they can't vote for programs on other platforms. Of course, one can change this by going into account info and selecting all calculators, but that's a little immature.

These could easily be implemented in JavaScript on the vote page, and would even out the differences between ASM and BASIC programs (because ASM!=BASIC -> screw BASMIC!!!).

~ferich

One more thing: since the new millenium is over a year away, I see you're giving ticalc.org a nice head start. They probably won't implement it in that time anyway, things happen so slow around here. :)

~ferich

Haha, true. :)