RE: A89: TI89 ROM vs HP49 ROM

To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: RE: A89: TI89 ROM vs HP49 ROM
From: Josh Cunningham <rogue_ant@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 1999 17:52:08 PDT
Delivered-To: assembly-89-outgoing@towerguard.unix.edu.sollentuna.se
Delivered-To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org
Reply-To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org


First, make no mistake about it, none of the Z80 calculators were written in 
bloated C.  If you don't believe me, ask Pat Milheron.  They were all 
assembly.  The only reason that I see for making the 68k based calcs was 
that their was a readily available c compiler for the 68k series, and TI 
didn't care enough to really put effort into their machines.  Hell they even 
had another company do the CAS for them!

Josh Cunningham


>From: Mark Scott <mscott@canada.dbcity.com>

>Finding competent people to do a huge project in ASM can be a difficult
>prospect at times.  Of course with a company as big as TI I'm sure they
>could scour the technology centers and find people willing to do work on
>their calculator, and even pay them to move.   They probably had the
>same old guys who did the other calculators work on it, and since it was
>in c before, it was easy for them.  Even I can program in Z80 and 68k to
>an extent, though there is no way in hell I could do all the stuff they
>manage.
>
>Mark E. Scott Jr.
>mscott@dbcity.net
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Josh Cunningham [mailto:rogue_ant@hotmail.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 4:51 PM
>To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org
>Subject: A89: TI89 ROM vs HP49 ROM
>
>
>
>I would just like to thank all those how responded.  But I feel, I don't
>
>know, like TI is being lazy.  I understand that the Saturn is a special
>number crunchier, but the 89 should have blown it out of the water!  But
>
>no... TI decided to not put in the extra effort, not take the 68k CPU to
>the
>fullest, not provide us with the same quality effort that HP did.  Don't
>get
>me wrong, I love my 89, but I feel that some how...we've been cheated.
>Cheated of what could have been.  Just think of optimized OS for the
>89/92+!
>   Not only the obvious speed improvements, but size improvement too.  I
>am
>no expert on Compiled C vs. Asm, but I can tell you that TI would have a
>
>hell of a lot more ROM space to put in more stuff.  They could have put
>in
>an on calc assembler right in the ROM, like HP did, they could have put
>in
>more math functions, they could have increased the numeric accuracy,
>they
>could have increased the number of digits to only be limited by RAM,
>they
>could have done all kinds of things.  BUT instead they decided to take
>the
>easy way out, let HP beat you with just a little bit more work, and a
>lot
>less machine.
>The TI89 could have been a lot more, but alas they cheated us.
>Maybe some TI guy will read this, and be furious.  Maybe he will take it
>to
>heart, either way I hope someone does read this who can do something
>about
>it, or at least will try.  After all its just my opinion.
>
>Sincerely
>
>Josh Cunningham
>
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
>
>


_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com