you might want to update your screen shots on the file information page because if you havent noticed by playing it the program looks alot different than it did

just a sugestion

the screen shot at ti-fr.org is correct

so does tinews :)

I am having yet another serious problem: I finally fixed the other problem that had to do with being able to send the program to my calc, but now when I try to run it, it say "address error". This is really annoying because i wanna play this game, please help.

-DaRkBlAd3

Tell me your calculator stats

what do you mean by stats? well, my calc is HW1 rom vs. 1.00, tell me if you need something else.

thanx,
DaRkBlAd3

Great job! Keep it up!

This is good. But I have a question.

Why do TI go out of their way to make everything difficult for us? They release the best calculators on the market and then stick a load of petty restrictions on them just to annoy us. Do they feel insecure and need something to hold over us to demonstrate their power? Or do they jsut to it because they are a bunch of sad individuals that don't like it when people manage something better than them?

What is the point of all this? Why can't TI design their calculators to help people? I bet the fancy equipment they use to block things increases the cost of the calculator. They could spend that money better on something that would improve the calculators rather than wreck them. Every time a ti89 game is released there's all this stuff about will it work on xyz? I don't blame people for asking that, I blame TI. They know we'll find a way around whatever they implement anyway, so why do they bother putting the restrictions in at all?

Maybe TI are picking up their stratergy from a certain large software company. Build in as many stupid features as possible into their products so that only they can write anything decent (smirk) for it.

Personally I think TI are just being childish. They design a new toy, they don't want people to use it for anything other than what they can do with it.

Maybe someone should start making a car that can only turn left corners. Maybe someone should make a computer that can't add prime numbers together. Maybe someone should design a telephone that only works when held upside down. Maybe someone should design some glasses that don't let you see red and blue at the same time. Maybe someone should design a CD player that can only play CDs with blue covers.

All those ideas are stupid. All of them can be worked around with effort. There is no point in having them. There is no point in the 8k limit or the greyscale problems.

TI, maybe you should stop being so lame. Your calculators are excellent, why ruin them? We will play games anyway.

Here ends the sermon according to me.

Ciaran

Now, the question is -- Will TI read this? And if so, will they respond? (by releasing a new AMS with no 8k limit, and maybe some other wanted features - like being able to 'rationalize' 1/sqrt(x) to sqrt(x)/x, especially since the 89 does that with numbers)

Maybe they will release a new ams without the 8k limit once it is compleatly broken (for all HW versions).

maybe you can't rationalize 1/squareroot(x) to
squareroot(X)/X , but TI89/92 works with this convertion conveniently . try this :
X/sq(X)
and TI will transform it to
sq(x)
because it's like this :
X * 1/sq(X) , but 1/sq(x)=sq(X)/X , so :
X * sq(X)/X
and TI will automatically respond sq(X) .
Conclution : you don't need to ask TI for the conversion , TI89/92 can do it for you when nessesary.
In trigonometry , try tan(x)+tan(y) or anything you want , TI89/92 will automatically transform to sin/cos without any command(if can) . Explore your calc .

You make some very good points there my friend. However, you have to keep one thing in mind. TI never stated that you could play "games" on you calculator. Also they never stated that they would support "games" from AMS 1.00 to 2.00. Why do you keep making TI the bad guy? They market their calculators as calculators, not Gameboys. However you have to keep in mind that TI also stated that they would have assembly information for "us," but all they relased were some memory and windowing routines they use, thanks alot TI. I would really like to see a real reason for the 8k limit however, that whole "FlashApp" thing is absurd.

George

Note that even these released informations (memory and windowing routines) are misleading. First, there is a lot of errors in windowing routines informations (see my documentation about them in tigcclib for comparation). Second, they didn't documented the key routine for the memory management: HeapDeref. Without this routine, the programmers used nasty and dirty macro DEREF which caused that the most of programs stoped working on AMS2.03. If they were written using legal TIOS call HeapDeref (undocumented) instead of DEREF macro, they should work on AMS2.03 without any troubles!

Hmmm, if only TI had documented it...

Ciaran

It's pretty hard to fit a complete periodic table in 8k. Say, 120 (roughly) elements, names of maybe 30 characters and then things like mass (floating point), electronegativity (or whatever it's called) and so on, that's another 30 bytes or so. Without compression that's ~7k. That leaves you with only 1k for the program. That's perfectly possible but for a decent program you need more than that.

I realise that TI aren't making a games machine but they're still being stupid. They have done lots of good things, why do they have to wreck them?

Ciaran

I think you can do your program using little files less than 8kb , instead using one large file of 8kb or more .
I don't know the reason of the 8kb limit , and I don't think TI wants to bother us , they know their enemy , Hewlett Packard , and they would never want to be overpassed by it . TI knows very well how HP calculators can be programed , without limit of nothing . So , I think that the 8kb limit it's necesary for something that we don't know . Maybe they are trying to persuade programers to make their programs using many little files , instead of one large file , because it will improve the execution.... I don't know ! . Anyway , I think calculators are calculators , but if you can run games in it , it would be a multiuse powerful tool .

Well, it is not problem to break Periodic table to two parts. Program itself can surely fit in 8K, while all data can be in separate file up to 63,5K long. The limit of 8 K apply only to executables.

The most of games also can be divided in two files, the program itself and sprites, backgrounds etc.

But, real problem is with porting of more complex programs where code is inherently longer than 8K. Tezxas is, for example 64 K of machine code , ScotFree 14 K, good chess can not fit in 8K, not mention other software we expect to have: electric circuit analysers as Spice, Web browser, compilers for high level languages ...

We realize that TI calculators are not Gameboys, but many people buy them because of the neat games they can play, so in a way TI people are only hurting themselves. It's also ridiculous that the ti83 and ti86 can run bigger assembly programs than the ti89, which costs $50 more. The ti89 can handle variables up to 64K under tios, so there's no technical reason why it should't run assembly programs >8K

Unfortunately there is. The ti89 won't let you run code in certain areas. The only way to avoid this (AFAICS) is to have the code in a string and copy it accross as needed.

Ciaran

This protection can be bypassed, I proved it, because TI engineers forgot that we are sometimes more clever than they are (more precise they made some "holes" in the protection mechanism which allows us to "pass" through them). However, we are still working on "universal" protection breaking method, although I don't know whether it will be finished (but note that Julien is already very far in this direction).

There is really no point in the 8k limit. But there IS a point in the greyscale problems. The video controller which does not easily support grayscale is much faster (needs smaller amout of time to refresh a display), so HW2 calcs are faster.

Hmmm, I see your point, but TI don't need to use fast GFX, it doesn't speed up anything else...

Maybe it's cheaper, I'll accept that as an excuse. Or maybe they were just trying to spoil our fun.

Ciaran

I think that you are not right, it just speed up everyhhing else, not only GFX. Note that video controler continously steals the processor time if the video is updated continously, like on HW1 calcs (e.g. it slows down the processing). If the controler is faster, the whole machine is faster. Even in an empty loop, HW1 controler continously refresh the display, so it is enough to change LCD address to get a new picture. This is not case on HW2, so even an empty loop is faster on HW2 than on HW1. Note that I am not apologizing TI; this is just my comment from a hardware point of view.

Hmmm, I didn't think it would do that, but maybe it does... From what I've seen with a ti86 and an oscilloscope the only time the ti86 screen slows down the processor is when you are trying to write to $fc00 -> $ffff (or wherever it happens to be at the time), then there may be a few wait states. Maybe I'm wrong, but the Port 4 refresh stuff seems to confirm that - changing interrupts to 300 times a second means the screen can't update completely.

Ciaran

Maybe you are right; I didn't check it with an oscilocope...

Amen. Well said.

The only reason I can see that TI would do such a thing is teachers and school systems. Schools buy TI graphing calculators, and in mass quantity. They usually choose TI over HP or Casio because of the good name. TI's are known to be some of the best calculators on the market... many math functions, good for students.

But we all take our calculators and play games on them, turning them into game machines. Now the teachers and administrators who made huge investments in these calculators get pissed. They say, "Hey TI... why do you make GameBoys instead of calculators! Make something so these stupid kids stop playing games... or this school system will go buy HP's next year!"

This may be their attempt at doing so, to please their biggest customers.

- Jeff

amen brother i feel you, hopefully soon somebody willl crack this mysterious 8k limit on the ti 89, which i must say is the best calculator eever made, and then we will show those greasy motherfu@#$%@! that no matter what they do to the calculators to feel like they have some power over us, we will always find the solution no matter what.

nice sermon McCreesh!

SOLID

bill