why don't code in C with asm routines when neccesary.
C is easier to debug.
that's what TI uses to make their ROMs.

that's the reason why ti's calcs are slower than hp's..... it is the asm. If it were in assembly, as hp's rom is, it would be at least 2x as fast

is your nick-name related with Jon Anderson ?

2x as fast? just a little more... 10 to 100x as fast :)
(depending the function)(yeah, sounds cool)

wha what?!?! thats me.

I'd like to see you code an entire ROM in assembler.

This type of a project requires much more finesse than brute force.

It's been done before, though. The 86 ROM was coded entirely in assembly.

Yes, but by professional assembly coders who were paid for their work and told exactly what to do. It's harder than it sounds.

- Jeff

HACK AMS 2.01 OR 2.02 .......
TI couldn't sue anyone because they already denied that they wrote it.
And if they claimed it was thiers, then we could counter sue for misadvertisement or something.
If anyone has 2.01 or 2.02, please send it to me.
I've tried getting it, but nobody has sent it to me :^(

Cavan

Baka... Ti never claimed that they didn't write it, read the damn license that comes with it. Ti never officially released these versions because they were non-finals of 2.03. I have 2.01 though, E-mail me if you really want it.
Btw, I think you fromagians (my word for french) are idiots. You'll never be able to hack up a rom, even if you could it could never compare to TI's, and you'd still never get the calc to accept it or graphlink to transfer it. You're all wasting your time, why don't you just go make a decent program instead?

Well, there is an idea TIOS would be much faster that the origional one But you might have to adjust the timing circut in order to get it to work. And make sure to keep the bcalls the same. And, And. Mabye you should ask TI for their code. It would be in C, but then you could eaisly make the few changes you want, I mean don't reinvent the wheel. And I disagree about the debugging part. C and C++ are MUCH harder to learn than asm, and harder and more frusterating to debug

REAL smart there. Ask TI for the source :P LIKE THAT WAS EVER GOING TO HAPPEN :) That'll just piss of TI and they'll make some kinda safeguards against it in new calcs or something ;)

I don't think there is much that TI could do to safeguard against people making a new ROM version. Even if they created some hardware to prevent this - anything is possible =-0

amicek

The programmers at TI will not be the only ones to get angry. Teachers, administrators for the college board and others will also get mad because the 89 will have awesome math functions that once only existed on HP's and software like mathematica, and maple. TO HECK with those who get angry. Programmers will make their own roms. Imagine an 83+ with the functions of a 92+. Of course, the 83 would be slower, but tests like the SAT, ACT, AP Calc, AP Physics, and GRE would become incredibly easy, mathematically speaking.

Teachers these days just don't understand. Give a kid a TI-Explorer, and he may look stupid with it at the beginning, but by the end of the semester he'll have hacked it to type letters, made an infrared link, and be sending the test answers to his friend from across the room.

- Jeff

Down with teachers, up with calculators!!!

That's my new favorite quote :)

The old one was from Contact:

"First rule of government spending: why build one when you can build two at twice the price!"

- Jeff

>Imagine an 83+ with the functions of a 92+.

Yes, i'm getting an image. . . .why, the TI-89? but of course! and IT (89) can be used on those big tests too!!

Actually, you can't use the 89 on the ACT (I had to use my 83+ because of that =/ ).

-Erik Davidson

WHAT?????? You mean to tell me you have never switched cases with your 89/83+??? IT'S EASY!!!! done it many times :P

yeh thats an awesome idea making a 92+ style rom for other calcs, is it gunna come out for ti-85's??? cuz i have an 85 and a 92+ but my teachers allways whining "you cant use them on sat's so you cant use it for this class" well reply soon please

laterz- Operations

Ti-85s are hrad roms, not flash, so they can't be modified, not matter what(unless you replace the roms physically). you notice people are talking about making roms for the TI-83+,89, and 92+ because they have flash rom!

Down with teachers, up with calculators!

Bah, quiet you! I want a 100% pure ASM FlashROM to rape the capabilties of my powerfull M68000 running at 10 MHz.

hw2=12mhz

so, they won't use that metod . :)

No, it's true, C is easier.

Dream1)
If someone could get the source code of the TI-OS, then they would be able to optimize it.

Dream2)
If someone could port the HP49G rom to the TI89
then we would get a new rom

Dream3)
If someone could do both things, then maybe a dual boot calc...mmm , this is a little stupid. But maybe to have 2 roms for choice.

nah...you have to code it in asm. C is nice,easy,etc... but not good enough.

the rom will need speed. however, C could be used for smaller functions

anyway it's a crazy idea :)

the rom would be a class thing to get though !
no more restrictions from ti etc...

Zaz

When one wants to use C for this (which is MUCH easier in the case of big programs), one could use a well-optimizing compiler like gcc. You also can spit out particular routines in asm and hand-optimize then.

Hack AMS 2.01 OR 2.02

Has anyone played monkeybomb it is the bomb!!!!!!!!! I love that game I am surprised that it did not get a feature on ticalc. I am currently porting it to asm with a bunch of new stuff. Oh yeah whoever made the hi-lo sprite thingy that is the bomb

1. C is much easier than assembly (especially 68k assembly)

2. C is MUCH slower than assembly (it so bloated you can't write z80 programs in C and hope to fit them on your calc)

3. Why start a whole new ROM, why not start with hooks (kinda like Omnicalc for the 83+) then jam them all together in one monster pack and build off of that.

4. This is gonna be hell to debug, you'd have to keep the EXACT same addressing as the original 89/92+ which means the ROM would need to be about the same size (another reason to use assembly).

5. If this is successful TI is gonna either sue you or recruit you (possibly with threats of legal action), but my experiences with TI leans toward sueing.

6. You could just throw this all together in a shell that doesn't have an exit option, effectively replacing the TIOS (but not screwing with the addressing) while allowing you to add all sorts of new features.

-Rejun2000
Thanks

yes, i like the no exit idea... it makes it seem like it is cool or something :)