ARRGH!!! This shouldn't be done!

If nearly all ti-92+ software is compatible, leave it in its own directory so that it doesn't junk up the v200 directory.

The archives have WAY too much crap in them. Try implementing a ranking system, rather than displaying them alphabetically. Give new software a week near the top to give them a fair chance, and then through them into the system as well.

I am SICK of seeing hundreds of uselesss programs! PLEASE do something about this.

We do have the ability to create links from one file to several other folders, so a v200/89/92+ program should only need to be uploaded once. Unfortunately, since this means that the program doesn't show up in the author's info page, he or she keeps uploading it until we add it as a physical file, even if it's listed in the other calculators' folders already.
To have a link created for a new file, just say so in the "comment to archiver" field. To create it for existing file pairs, just mail filearchive with a request (include the file ID:s, or links to the fileinfo pages). The files can be merged, so no download stats are lost.

For assembly programs now, they are not nearly all compatible. Most of the compatibility progblems are fairly easy to fix, but with old abandoned programs this may not be done even though it is easy. Particulary programs can break these reasons:

1) Kernel-based programs won't work if you try to use DoorsOS (this can be fixed just by telling the user to run PreOS).

2) Some nostub program that try to detect the calculator type will think it is a TI-89 and use the TI-89 key map, making input very hard to give. There actually is a 'patch' which can fix this in at least some programs, and fixing the detection code is simple.

3) Nostub programs compressed with PPG and using certain old versions of the ttstart launcher will fail. The bug in the launcher was fixed a long time ago, but some programs still might have old launchers included. To fix this, only the launcher and not the program itself needs to be changed. Also if you use a shell which decompresses PPG itself this will not be a problem.

4) And of course there could be other, more complex, problems with some programs.

---

When it comes to keeping out lame programs, I think that is a great idea. But of course there is the problem of choosing who can decide which programs should be kept. With user rankings, note of course that counting the downloads will favor programs with a description that makes them sound good even if they aren't, and if users give ratings to the programs, some people might vote over and over for their own programs.

And one more thing: All but the third of these problems is likely to affect TI-89 and TI-92 Plus users as well if they upgrade to AMS versions above 2.05.

Well, to prevent users from voting over and over for their favorite programs, they could add some PERL script that says if they've voted for it or not.

The ranking system I was thinking of would be having a ranking from 1-10, and you could vote on it (only once), but only if you have already downloaded it. That way other people could submit their views on the program. Then, you could choose to view them in the ranking list order, so you could see which programs others think are the best/worst. It's just an idea, but it would take a lot of scripting, and I'm not all that good at PERL, so I wouldn't be any help. :(

With some computers the "PERL" thing might not work...you could just have people sign in, and maybe put a password in the archive so they would have to download it before they could vote

Yeah, but that would be a pain. The PERL would work on pretty much any computer (unless the browser is really old and crappy). This whole site pretty much runs on PERL. Look at the upload form, or even this message board! It's all run by PERL.

The function keys on a v200 are no longer on the side. This will the key layout of may games.

I have to agree, but how do we decide what's useful. I like your idea for week at the top then ranking, but combine it with more specific folders. It is also amazing to me how many rude BASIC programmers will upload some piece of junk as an asm program, where even the screenshots are clearly BASIC, just because that no one looks at BASIC programs (or so they think).

Really? I never saw anything like that. People were really uploading BASIC programs into the ASM folders?

OMG, yes! The 83+ dir for Mirage is full of crapy basic programs. p00p! to the people that uploaded them!

I've seen ASM programs in the BASIC programs folders before ...

I've seen that before, but not the other way around.

p00p! to them!

I hate the arpgcs programs for the 83+. Those aren't really (good) games in my opinion...

arpgcs? What's that stand for? Is the rpg in there stand for Role Playing Game?

It's a program for the TI-83+ that allows you to make your own RPGs. From what I've heard, it's not that great (or at least the games made with it aren't)

Oh, okay thanks. Never heard of it I guess because I don't have that model.

Well, as any tool of its kind, one's who use it either make good games or don't. I think ARPGS was somewhat revolutionary as it allowed people with no ASM programmin skill make their own games. Come on, if you can't program calcs but wish to have your own game and not with speed of Basic programs you'd welcome this tool. Of course it has its limitations, but really, it depends how people use it. There were some very nice games made with ARPGS.

New programs already get posted on the main page of ticalc.org by default, so I think that posting them at the top of the archives listing is not really necessary. However, I do agree that there should be some sort of ranking system with maybe the top ten programs displayed first in the web archives (but require a minimum number of votes), and then the rest sorted alphabetically. There could also be an option to show only programs above a certain rating.

There should at least be some sort of "sort by:" field in the archives to let you choose between alphabetical or date-wise sorting. And maybe ranking/number of downloads too if they could be implemented fairly.

While I'm at it, a "display N files per page" field would be nice too.

There exists a link to sort by date, yes... Try the one called "Date".

that sounds pretty logical :-)

Well, I realize I must look pretty stupid, but what I actually meant was... um... it's important to uh...

*runs away*

LOL You're probably smarter than me.