Re: A89: Cracking AMS 2.01

[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: A89: Cracking AMS 2.01



>From the side of a programmer;

It doesn't bother me if you can have commercial software that's purchased
and signed.  When trying to sell software, TIs signing scheme is excellent.
Given 256-bit RSA key size no current computer can crack it.
(Wait a decade and quantum computers will crack it in a day...)

What _does_ bother me is the 8kB limit imposed to non-signed programs.
What purpose does that serve, except to make freeware programming more
difficult?


I think you're wrong about a minority not making a difference to TI.
Negative publicity never helps a product.  Luckily TI is no "microsoft of
calculators".  If TI just screws its supporters why wouldn't students and
schools use HP calculators?

I mean, TI _isn't_ superior when compare to HP and some HP models are very
aggressively priced:  HP48S with 32kB memory (=symbolic) is $20 cheaper
than basic Ti-85  (local store prices)  I'm sure that you can solve with
HP48S any problem you can solve with Ti-86.  And I believe its the
excellent user service of HP that probably lead many to think that TI
would similarly actually support its userbase.


I for one support the idea of petitioning for free programming.


As for of asm compatability, I don't think that's an issue:  If you've
originally made a Ti-OS friendly program, it'll work on any ROM, much like
LexOS does.  Though, until SDK is released this is quite difficult.

HWv1 vs HWv2 issue is also ugly.  I'm currently discussing the matter with
my local TI representative so I don't want to make any hasty comments.


	- Riba



On Wed, 1 Dec 1999, M. Adam Davis wrote:
> 
> First off, let me re-iterate that the letters from TI suggest one of two
> possibilities:
> 1) They didn't develop this version of AMS
> 2) It isn't an official release, and as such, they won't answer any
> questions about it.
> 
> Either way, we all know that there will be significant differences
> between AMS 1 and AMS 2.  The fact: It doesn't matter if they require
> signing of programs, or put size limits on them, etc.  They will have a
> function which returns a true or false after determining if the program
> is signed.  We can hex edit it to always return true.  They will have
> another function checking the size, we can change that as well. 
> Whatever roadblocks they put in the way certianly won't be any more
> difficult to break through than it was to put asm programs onto the
> other calcs which were never meant to have user ASM on it.
> 
> Does it really matter to them that we don't like how the 'AMS 2.01'
> handles programs?  Not a whole lot.  We only represent a small minority
> of the total users of TI calculators.  In fact, their user base and main
> customers are teachers and educators.  The teachers and educators
> actually WANT to make it hard for students to use their calculators as
> gameboys.  The teachers also want to know if a piece of software has
> TI's seal of approval on it.  Once they start saying that a ti-86 is
> required for a specific course, then the students follow along.  In
> fact, it is usually not until AFTER a student buys a calc that s/he
> finds out about assembly games and shells and other such stuff.  The
> majority of TI calculator users don't even know about ticalc.org and
> other calc places.
> 
> The fact that TI has added assembly programming to their newer calcs is
> more in response to the HP calulators and the educators desire for more
> powerful applicaions than anything else.  It is a nice thing that they
> listen to 'us', but we don't hold stock, nor can we say that we control
> or even influence a significant portion of their market.
> 
> If you think TI wouldn't place restrictions on the calculator, you are
> very sadly mistaken.  Crying about it isn't going to get you anywhere.
> 
> TI is listening to this mailing list a little, so your CONSTRUCTIVE and
> useful comments are probably good, but get a grip, this is a machine,
> not your life!  If you want a powerful more customizable machine, make
> one, get another product, or crack TI's products.
> 
> You probably wouldn't believe how surprised many people were when TI
> announced ASM accesability on newer calcs, but now that they've given
> you an inch, you are crying foul that they haven't given you a mile.  I
> would characterize many here as spoiled brats who let go of their
> balloon.
> 
> -Adam
Follow-Ups: References: