I'm now downloading it as well. Mmmm... The ability to make Flash apps for my 89 and my 92Plus finally... I wonder how fast I'm going to mess up my calc... >:)

You will be able to make flash apps, but it is impossible to send them to your calculator without a developer's certificate--which comes with the purchase of the completed SDK (or if TI likes you :) ).

Give me a few days to find a way around that. ;)

No, It's harder than most think or expect... If you want your own apps on your calc, purchase the SDK

How much does the SDK cost?

expect $299

Hm... My next question is, is it really worth paying that much for?

With the $300 version, you get 10 application signings. You can do whatever you want with them... Make freeware apps or commercial apps. Think of this, if you made an extensive application and sold it for $10 per copy (which is cheap for 68k apps), All you'd need to sell was 10 copies and you'd break even (TI takes out some fees, but still.. you get the idea). The chances are, if its a good app (not a game) it'd sell much more than 10 copies and you'd make a good ammount of money off it. So, yah, it's a good tradeoff...

I thought TI had to look at every file you created before they let you have the application signing?

No guarantees this is correct, but I'm fairly certian this is how it works:

First you purchase the SDK License (Educational, probably $100 for 3 signings, or Professional, probably $300 for 10 signings), along with which you'll obtain a Developer Certificate and Key File. With these files, you'll be able to run your programs on your own calc(s). When you've sufficiently site tested it, you send the source off to TI to sign. TI reserves the right to review your code and refuse to sign it if they see anything they don't like. If they approve it and you ask for a shareware or freeware signature, they'll sign the app and send it back to you. If you want to sell it on a per-copy basis, I believe you can reach an agreement to have TI market it for you in their store for a certain price.

That's hilarious. So basically, all that flashrom space for flashapps is being sold by TI, who are making a profit off storage space they don't own, and charging developers money, just so they can make full use of the hardware.

There's just something about this whole signing deal that just strikes me as wrong, unethical, and greedy. It's not their calculator, and it's not their software

I do hope they get it cracked, so TI can bitch, whine, and try suing everyone for wanting to make use of their calculators.

I give those people trying to crack the certification 2 to 3 more months till they get it. Then you can mess up your calc.

"There are no comments to this post yet. Why don't you add one?"

Thanks to my forgotten password, I was unable to get first comment. :(

FINALLY! Hey, they should have 13-20 y.o. guys working for them so things get done faster ;) j/k

Heh, I'll second that.

TI, feel free to email me about a job, I know C, C++, ASM, and TI-Basic. :)

Actually, they had several of us doing just that. You shoulda seen the typos in the first revision of the documents =)

Yah, they were pretty bad... also code that didnt work... etc..

It's a good thing the TI-GCC documentation was so good. TI's documentation is in the form of a 1300 page pdf file that is not linked together very well. It might work in a printed form, but a book is not what a programmer wants. Documentation should be more like TI-GCC or Microsoft Visual Studio. You can't even copy and paste source code from TI's docs.

From my limited use of the SDK, it does not seem to be much more useful than the TI-GCC IDE.

-Sean

TI-GCCLIB is very good documentation, but this SDK documentation will show you things that you never knew your calc could do... I've been amazed ever since we got this a while back... Its great! Just give it a try!

But these nice features works only in Flash APPS!!!

At least, so far. I am working of a workarround (i.e. to discover how you can fully feature your calc in normal ASM/C programs).

This is true, but thats what I'm going to be using the SDK for, so it doesn't matter to me... But I can definatly see your point...

If anyone can create a workaround, you can.

BAH! The SDK doesn't like Windows Millenium Edition. :( I even tried manually adding the "Set SIERRA=C:\SIERRA" into the CMDINIT.BAT in the Windows\Commands directory (What MS did to prevent "harmful" tampering to Windows, this file auto restores the autoexec.bat file every reboot), and it still did not want to work. Anyone out there with Windows ME that wants to lend me a hand in this?

Try also adding c:\sierra\bin to your PATH variable.
PATH=%PATH%;c:\sierra\bin
I don't have Windows ME, but that's what's in my autoexec.bat file on Windows 98.

Didn't work. OBVIOUSLY this SDK isn't Win ME compatible like they say. They think if it works on 95/98, then it'll automatically work on Windows ME.

Yes it is, I've been running the SDK on WinME for over a month with no problems.

Hm... I ran the installer (after installing the latest VM from MS), and it installed both the Flash Studio and then the Sierra compiler, but after the reboot, it doesn't want to recognize the compiler, even though I see it in the autoexec.bat and have implanted it into the cmdinit.bat file in the Windows/Commands dir.

Am I doing something wrong that I'm not aware of to get it working? If you think you can help me, please do. I've been anxious to try out this SDK for a while.

If I remember correctly, winMe does not load the autoexec.bat and config.sys files on startup which would mean that it does not matter if the line is there or not because windows is not loading it.

This is how you need to so it in Win ME. ME's autoexec.bat will not do anything but SET commands.
Here's mine and it works:
SET windir=C:\WINDOWS
SET winbootdir=C:\WINDOWS
SET COMSPEC=C:\WINDOWS\COMMAND.COM
SET PATH=...;C:\SIERRA\BIN
SET PROMPT=$p$g
SET TEMP=C:\WINDOWS\TEMP
SET TMP=C:\WINDOWS\TEMP
SET SIERRA=C:\SIERRA

Add the following lines before the "SET TEMP=C:\Windows\Temp" part of your Autoexec.bat file.

@DelTree /Y C:\WINDOWS\Temp
@MD C:\WINDOWS\Temp

It clears your temp directory on reboot, freeing up a lot of harddrive in some cases.

Oh, and another thing. You know the system restore feature? That's why Windows ME seems slower than Windows 98, because every time you touch a file, it makes a backup copy in the C:\_RESTORE directory. You touch an MP3, oops, it has to make a backup copy. And want to know the real kicker? It KEEPS making copies, all the way until you have only 200mb free on your harddrive.

How to shut this off? Well, this was another kicker. You can't simply delete the backed up files because the entire _RESTORE directory is marked as in use and thus can't be deleted. And since Microsoft removed the "Exit to DOS" feature, one can't just exit Windows to a DOS prompt like before. While there is an obscure "Disable System Restore" option buried away in the System control panel applet, interestingly enough under the "Performance - File System - Troubleshooting" tab, that still doesn't help with all the wasted hard disk space.

So here is my brute force solution to shut off and remove all traces of System Restore:

-In Control Panels, Add/Remove Programs, create a Windows boot disk. It's really an MS-DOS boot disk.

-Shut down Windows and reboot the PC from the floppy disk.

-Go the C: prompt by typing C:

-Type "C:\WINDOWS\COMMAND\DELTREE C:\_RESTORE" to remove all the System Restore files. This may take a while, and in my case, it took two hours on a PIII 900.

-Create a bogus file called _RESTORE by, for example, running EDIT and creating a blank text file.

-Type "C:\WINDOWS\COMMAND\ATTRIB +r +s +h _RESTORE" to hide this file. This will prevent Windows from re-creating its hidden directory.

Now reboot the PC and watch Windows Millennium run much faster!

I just figured that I'd share this secret with fellow people running Windows Millennium. May the revolution begin! >:)

That is really a useful fact to know! Are you positive that is the only way to stop the function of the _Restore dir?

amicek

Unfortunately, it is. Microsoft doesn't like it when you try to disable their little features that they worked so hard on. If you follow my previous instructions, you WILL notice a difference. I definately did. And I have the free harddrive space to prove it. :)

Remember, when you create the bogus file, make sure you only type in _RESTORE as the name, no extension after it, otherwise it won't work. This way, the computer can't distinguish it was a folder or a file, and therefore, can't write to it.

"This way, the computer can't distinguish it was a folder or a file, and therefore, can't write to it."

That should be...

can't distinguish it AS a folder or a file

Nope. He is wrong. Open control panel, click on performance, click on file systems, click on trouble shooting, and the last option is disable system restore. The benefits of beta testing(they had to put it in bc all the beta testers were screaming.)

No, he's right.

You can turn it off, but the folder would still be perpetually marked as in use, and windows will recreate the folder. Unless you do what he specifies, windows will ignore you (remember, microsoft knows what's best for you, so you'd better not argue...) and recreate the folder/prohibit you from deleting it.

you can clear like he said and it will always stay empty and then on bootup, it want sit there tring to create a directory. it is faster that way

Um... Wrong dude. If you get rid of the folder, then it is faster, and that I know for a fact. Believe me on this one.

TI-Files comming back up in a max of 2 weeks? WOO HOO!

Will people still be able to view the page in the original theme? Or will there be no traces of that left? :(

I did say that there was that option, BUT, it will STILL make backups of files. Don't believe me? Delete that _RESTORE folder from DOS, and reboot your computer with the System Restore Disabled tab checked. You'll see.

Bah, ignore that last line, I posted without thinking. I just woke up about 5 minutes ago, my brain isn't away yet.

It WON'T make more backups is what I mean. But you still have to reboot in DOS to save the disk space. But, by using the method above, you can permanently disable the feature, because it definately isn't needed, and is just a waste of CPU cycles and harddrive space.

"my brain isn't away yet. "

@#$*)(^@$^!!!!!!!!!!!

That should be

my brain isn't AWAKE yet.

I told you I just woke up 5 minutes ago. ;)

I think you're my new hero. That was the best idea I've seen in a few months. My computer works a heck of a lot faster now. You da man!

*takes a bow before his loyal fans*

I've found many other ways to speed up Windows, but this is the only method that doesn't require disassembling a few files with SoftICE. ;)

How much _does_ it speed up Windows? Is it like just closing another tray application?

How big the difference is all depends on your system. On mine, it was very noticable.

the sdk isnt the only thing that dosent like windows me..