TI-92's cover some of these points:
You can do 3d graphing on a TI-92.
Matrices can be lists/cells or whatever you explained up there in one of your points.

A TI-92 is more powerful, and not everyone has reached the 'brick wall' in TI-92's. That, or they have become overcomed.
A TI-83/85 don't have merely as many functions, due to memory probably. The EOS for those calcs can't handle the TI-92 EOS's stuff.

92 doesn't do any 3d graphing the 89 doesn't. Try doing parametric plots in 3 variables. There's no real 3d engine here, just the surface thing.

I wish people would understand that there isn't any real functionality difference b/t the 89 and 92+...

If you really think what your saying you obviously don't know your calculators. The 89 AND 92 arn't actually 3D graphs, they are a sad illusion created by multiple linear graphs... <Sigh>

Yeah!

People have been able to do the same thing on the 86--for my 2 var calc class a while back I was using Funk3D, which was just as good as the 89's, more or less.

About CAS extensions: TI probably just can't put any extended operations, like function analysis, into their calculators (especially TI-89), because that means that TI-89s might lose the privilege of being allowed on AP Calculus tests. If you think of a calculator as a mathematical device (I do - mostly), you have to consider the fact that allowing too much operations enables everyone to cheat like crazy. That's why we are not allowed to take any programmable calculators to school in Germany, and I think it's a good thing.

If you are looking for some function analysis, by the way, check out 'Sebastian's Calculus Package' in the 'TI-89 BASIC Math Programs'. It is pretty good at some stuff, for example sign charts (even of discontinuous functions, derivatives of functions, and so on). I have a little update on sign charts, but I can't get it on my PC because my link cable broke. Anyways, it might be some of what you are looking for.

Or they're just planning to release Calc functions in the next Flash application.

See the catch here? They can release calculators lacking in functionality/content and release "updates" at a nominal fee.

--BlueCalx

Then why didn't they do that yet? They've had enough time already to at least do something of that sort, even if it come's pretty close to Microsoft's techniques.

Becuase they never realized that development for calculator programs would be so widespread.

Did ANYONE think ticalc.org - or any site remotely like it - would even EXIST five years ago?

--BlueCalx

If it means anything to anyone, I had an inklin that something like ticalc.org would happen at one time of another.....

Yes, but I agree with Nick: Who would think that a so many young programmers would gather around a single website? Since I have only been among them for three months, I don't know a lot about ticalc.org's past. If I were a TI programmer in the present, though, I would be quite astonished at what has been done with those calculators. In fact, I was astonished when I first visited the site. Now it is clear to me how many people actually use TIs, but I am still quite astonished.

Lol, sounds like an unbiased opinion of calculus programs ("check out 'Sebastian's Calculus Package' in the 'TI-89 BASIC Math Programs'. It is pretty good at some stuff"). Maybe you should write reviews of your programs for ticalc. Seriously, though, I might check out your file soon for the AP Calc exam soon. My only worry would be that someone else's programs might have unchecked errors, as I have often found. Maybe I'll just see if there's anything I really need.

If you are looking for an objective opinion of a couple great programs, download Super Riemann Sums by Jonathan Mendelson or Super Cool Text by Jonathan Mendelson, which includes 4 modes of text animation including a scrolling Super Slope option that has the text bounce back and forth smoothly and quickly in an almost parabolic look (see http://ti89.n3.net/myprogs.html for a screenshot).

You're right about that part of my item not being very objective. The first paragraph, though, has nothing to do with my program, so take those two as two seperate texts. Anyway, how am I supposed to get downloads if I don't have a chance for a news article. All articles are based on games, shells, or features; math programs don't have a place in there.

That's a good point about only the games getting features. I bet it's possible to get a feature if you're releasing a large new non-game project. A circuit simulator even got a subdomain here. I honestly think there should be a better rating system. Maybe a simple thing where you could rate a program from 1-10 in a couple clicks would be nice, because reviews take far too long to write.

The pity is that there is absolutely no feedback coming from people who actually really use the programs. The download numbers just tell you how well the program was distributed, and the reviews are probably not based on a month's experience with the program. Also, from my over 4,000 downloaders, there were exactly 3 people emailing me.

Yeah, true... I personally don't write because I didn't have pop and writing online with hotmail is a hassle. But one of the most important aspects of freeware and open source is the the power to make the programs what we want and aknowledge the fact that someone had a great idea.
Also, a better rating system is a great idea. Basing it on the number of downloads will obviously bias it toward 'newsworthy' items, and not as much to practical ones. A simple 1-10 voting system seems fine. Also, keeping a full list of programs with reviews, notes,date of release/update, whatever for a particular calc so one could just check it out and randomly find a nice program.

Paulo Marques
aka
Cd_Slayer

Calc.org has a rating system similar to that, including user submitted reviews of programs. I think it's one of the best reviewing systems going right now.

Hey, those are all great suggestions. I like do a lot of stuff by hand but I wouldn't frown on improvements like that for automation. But, I would like to point out one thing: this is a calculator at a fair price. If we want big programs, huge prices, etc, then there are different mediums. If you ask me, they have done a great job on including what they can in a small portable system at a fair cost. They HAVE left room alone for us to utilize. If you want very nice programs, the computer is there. If you want portability with ability to help speed up functions and some advanced capability, thats what they give. And about the programming and stuff, its assembly. They aren't going to write in abilty to easily code in C or something to that extent, too much time and resources wasted(and even if not, why do it just for fun).

-Corey Taylor

C _is_ easy. At least with my IDE... :)

I definitely agree with the things Ben points out. My current calc is a TI86, and as a grade 13 student (yes, grade 13) it has been a lifesaver on several occasions. However, I am familiar with the capabilities of the 89/92 series and I have to believe that there is more TI can do to create a calculator platform designed with high-level mathematics and engineering in mind. Yes, we could all use Mathematica if we really needed zillions of functions, but its cost and reliance on a computer are limitations in that it is not a portable system. What TI needs to do is take everything they have learned from creating graphing calcs and bump it up a few notches so that the result is a calc that is suitable for use in industry and not just secondary school. Processor speed and how many KB (megs?) of RAM are tertiary issues; what is needed is a calc with actual applications in the working world.

I couldn't agree more. Keeping a line of educational tools is nice (and as somebody pointed out earlier, it keeps calculators legal on standardized tests) but they fall short in the professional world. I don't think the price would be too high; TI could take the best features of its products and add features comparable to those of the HP 49, plus a little extra. They already have the DERIVE package to work from and supposedly a C compiler in the works for the 68K...

I'm not sure if such a calculator would be profitable...but from what I hear, people would like to see something intermediate in power between the calculators and computer software.