it is my guess that this OS upgrade is actually just a security upgrade that will just make it harder to hack your calculator or harder to do asm stuff like messing with there apps, but i am dumb, so who knows

fixed my calc. anyone who played phoenix 1.2 while having your language set to german and had a text display bug.....those of you out there....this fixes it...maybe a few other things too, but thats why its there

1.13 is really better. I have a little archive space left and the memory menu was opening slow, but after installing 1.13, I felt that the menues are opening a bit faster and I have less problems with BASIC programs running on MirageOS.

oh, on a side note... when i tried to install the new os, i was unable to. it said my batteries were low are something and it locked up the computer. they may have been low, but i doubt it, i remember replacing them recently and i have not used it since i replaced the batteries hardly at all, it has just been sitting on my shelf. now my calculator will not work at all, it just sits there demanding software. oh wellsies

You must give it the software! It took me like 10 tries so keep at it!!!!!!

your calc manual tells you what you can do:

1. Take out a battery
2. Press and hold CLEAR while you put it back in
3. Keep holding CLEAR, then press & hold ON
4. Keep them held until the home screen appears

What happened is his ROM failed. I am the master ROM failer! I've figured how to fail my ROM multiple ways (doing so hides the programs in your archive; the only way to get 'em back is to send them again or clear your RAM!) Make a new Program:

PROGRAM:A
:AsmPrgm
:CD5547C9 <-(The TI-83 asm code to clear the
(screen except a different asm setup!

Then type:

Asm(PrgmA

Enter.
If your batts aren't low, it will usually fail your ROM.
Please reply if you read this comment. I want to see if anyone ever looks at the old news items.

ok, does 5/17/02 as today make this an old news item (see above post)? anyways, if anyone else reads this, tell me how to send the ROM to my calc. i am not one of those newbies who doesn't know anything, i know a lot about ti calcs, but i can't get this to work. pleae help.

If anybody likes to program in basic in the editor and calls an assembly rountine with any error the calc does weird things. the main thing it likes to do is clear the ram. it is messed up with the error messages and doesn't display them just clears the ram

Heh, 83+ OS update... New software can't help that wretched thing!

I will have to see if actually does anything though...
"advanced functionality and fixes," sure...

Maybe I will start using my bro's 83+ with OS 1.13 instead of my 89. Wait, nevermind, my 89 OS is 2.05, thats obviously better than 1.13, in fact, its 181% better!


Maybe I will get first post for once, seems like the only other post (being a "first post" comment) is going to be deleted. Nah, with my luck, someone else just posted something while i was typing all this junk. :)

Yeah? Would you use Mac OS X over Windows 2000 just because Mac OS X has a version number of 10 and Windows 2000 has a version number of 5.00.2195? :-P

Hey man don't trash macs, i don't own 1 but i use a G3 at school and i got to say its the sweetest machine i have ever seen. In fact i would have to say its more superior then a regular pc because its architecture is more faster as well as its bus speed(a 500mhz mack would act more like a 900mhz pc). You all would probably be using a mac right now if they hadn't forbid the cloning of their work. IBM knew this and allowed the further spreading of their infernal machine because they couldn't produce enough and it was the only way to make people buy it, by buying out the competition.

I got two words for all of you:

GO LINUX!

Guess what MAC os 10 is? LINUX.

That's why you need to be running system 9 within system 10 to run all your old programs, they completely abandoned the MacOS Kernel in favor of the superior, more stable, linux kernel

Umm... you might want to reconsider that statement.

>>Guess what MAC os 10 is? LINUX.<<

Wrong. MacOS X is not Linux. MacOS X was based off FreeBSD. While they are both UNIX variants, there are clear differences between FreeBSD and Linux (read Slashdot once in a while, you'll easily find out). Even saying that MacOS X is FreeBSD is false. Apple used portions of FreeBSD to build a microkernel. Apple then threw in a compatability layer for MacOS 9 programs.

All I have to say is, learn your operating systems.

He's right
Linux is NOT the Mac OS

Anyway, about the TI-83+ os...

I have noticed that pulling a battery out while it is on will not clear the ram... which is kind of cool... worth the upgrade

It also displays the mem and apps menus faster
I'm happy with it

OK, let me rephrase that - would you use Mac OS X over Debian Linux 2.2 just because it has a higher version number?

NO Mac OS, in my opinion, is better that Linux. :-)

Well you're an idiot then. MacOS looks nice, but then since KDE can be made to look just the same, there's no point using it.

What? How am I an idiot? I said the exact same thing you did - there's no point in using Mac OS if KDE can be made the same.

Next time, maybe you should read what I say before you call me an idiot.

No, KDE can't do that, actually. Granted, they've got antialiased fonts now, but last I knew, there was no dock (just a Windows-esque taskbar), no window morphing animations, no pulsating buttons, etc., etc. And let's not forget about the apps and the underlying layer: Quartz is nice. Many people need IE. A blanket statement like "there's no point in using OS X" is wrong.

There is a dock if you choose to install it. Even Gnome has one, and it's at least two weeks behind KDE. You can turn on all the cute animations if you have nothing better to do with your CPU time. And as for needing IE, erm, for what?

Well, there is going to be an IE for Mac OS X, and Konqueror for KDE is almost as good as IE itself. If Microsoft doesn't intentionally port IE to other platforms, the users sometimes take the initiatives themselves.

Mac OS x is UNIX and it ten times as better as Windows. i don't like Macs(i like workstations like the Sun Blade 100) but it a VERY nice OS.

Right. No one understands what I'm saying. Mac OS may be better than Windows, or it might not. Whatever. I never mentioned Windows, and I'm not about to start a flame war about which is better. I merely said that judging a new OS on its version number is not a good thing to do. The only reason I started saying good stuff about Linux is because someone accused me of "trashing Macs."

So. I'm saying, don't judge an OS by its version number. I AM NOT SAYING THAT WINDOWS OR LINUX IS BETTER THAN MAC OS. I AM ALSO NOT SAYING THAT MAC OS IS BETTER THAN WINDOWS OR LINUX.

Just to clarify. :-)

I'm one of the few that understand what you are saying. In your previous statement you stated Mac OS's inferiority to Linux. I agree with you on that (although I like the looks of OS X, but I was disapointed to find that Apple has done it yet again, failed to include a CLI in their OS (which I don't think they have ever done). And they dare call it a UNIX based system).

Yeah, and even Linus Torvalds said "Frankly, I think it's a piece of crap." :-P

I have seen instances of a CLI in there, but it's Real Hard (tm) to get to.

Actually, the news now is that Linus never really said that...

Oh, well... yeah, I guess he did have some PR to worry about.

The scary part is that I can actually imagine him saying that, as opposed to Steve Ballmer... :-)

Mac OS X has a CLI. The program is called 'Terminal,' and it runs FreeBSD's /bin/sh by default. It seems like everyone is talking out their ass here.

Nice comment, lol. Well, I didn't know about the terminal in OS X, so thanks for pointing it out. I still like Linux better, as OS X has poor hardware support. If you doubt me on this, even Apple themselves say that.

WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH THE TI-83+ OS v1.13 ?????????????????????????????????

It was inevitable, anytime anyone says anything about Macs or Windows, this always happens. It's kinda stupid in my mind. Can't people just respect other's opinions or preferences?

Yeah, I'm sorry if my comments were misinterpreted, but I never intended to start an OS war. I just meant to show that version numbers weren't always the best indicator of quality.

First, please don't respond to this about what OS is better.

Second, You are right. Any mention of which OS is better will spark an argument. It is even fiercly contested in my school. Last year, one student put an atomic Mac sticker on her lab book and another put a macintrash sticker on his lab book. AGAIN, PLEASE DON'T RESPOND WITH PERSONAL PREFERENCES OR WHY ONE IS BETTER.

Third, this topic has been beaten into the ground enough times.

Forth, for an example, would you choose a 92, no plus module, and no upgrade possible, over an 89? I would choose an 89, because it has Flash Rom, is allowed on the SAT, and isn't discontinued.

I agree, it is kind of, wait, totally stupid. I dropped out of that arguement with that one survey's message board. If I want to have an arguement about Mac's, Linux, and Windows, I'll go over to windrivers.com, where the people actually know what they are talking about. It sure is a lot more productive than some 13 year old complaining that everyone hates their mac on here.

A 500Mhz Mac does NOT act like a 900Mhz PC. In testing, a dual g4 at 500Mhz was oplessly beaten by a single proc PIII. When they brought the PIII back to full power (1gig of ram rather than 128Mb, 2 gigahertc procs instead of 1 533) the mac was even more hopelssly defeated. And now with the P4 and the Georce3, a mac has no chance of redemption. It is also nice to be able to buy perhipherals that don't have to mac logo or don't need an adapter. I can take stuff from a yardsale and plug it straight in, no matter what obscure manufacturer made it.

That's just Intel... wouldn't an AMD Athlon maximize the gap even more?

what did they test with? Photoshop optimized for a mac will beat the pants off photoshop optimized for a pc, I will say however that that is about all they are good for ;)

Oh, and like everyone has a 2 GHz processor with 1 GB of RAM at home.
<sarcasm>
Yeah, I know I do!
</sarcasm>

And, as another side note, It isn't really possible to compare two different computer archetectures. It's like comparing apples (no pun intended) to oranges. Sure, they are both fruit, but one has more vitamin C, while the other has a more gentle taste to it.

The point is that a PC with similiar (cause they are different platform) specs can beat a Mac in a good deal of performance tests (though the Mac is very good at graphics).

'a good deal' as in not all, and not most, just a bit more. But a PC is much easier to upgrade than a Mac, especially when you remember all the parts available for PC.

MACS SUCK.

he didn't trash macs. all he did was talk about it's version number

The G3 is not the sweetes machine! The G4 Power Book is!

I knew someone would post right before I finished!

Anyway, I was just extending Eric's joke in the article...

We all know that the 89 is supoerior to the 83+, and the OS has a higher version number to prove it! :p On top of that, it costs more too!

And of course we all know that this new 83+ version will be better than the old 89 1.05 vesion because of its higher version number. lol

Well, of course!

This whole flame war bit is funny. I guess some people just can't detect sarcasm, even when its a applied with a brick...

I was acting like your average induhvidual. The mindset I am MAKING FUN OF :

Bigger always means better.

I'm glad someone out there is bright enough to realize that I was merely joking...

Consumers know that version 1.0 of anything is garbage, so soon enough programmers will begin using randomy generated version numbers.

(I neverthough the <blink> tag would be useful, but right about now I wish I could use it. All caps will have to do though)

I AM BEING SARCASTIC!

Everyone here _should_ be smart enough to know that a version number is meaningless, other than to know what version of a particular program is newest.

Anyways, I got a good laugh from all the posts on this thread, but lets stop the off-topic babbling and ranting, link calculators and sing ... (Aw crap, I can't spell that! Phonetics time! Read it aloud if you need to ;o)) Coom-buy-ya.

Yeah, I did detect that sarcasm in your joke... but I suspected that some other people didn't so I tried to clarify. Turned into a flame war.

I hate when that happens... :-P

Well thanks for um, looking out for me... or something