A89: Re: What platform should we develop for?

To: <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
Subject: A89: Re: What platform should we develop for?
From: "Juan Corral" <juancorral@lvcm.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 08:21:46 -0700
References: <38F8B659.56390B89@drigon.com> <002d01bfa907$0902b1e0$15be1ad0@foxinternet.net>
Reply-To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org

I am semi-biased in this topic, and I would have to say HW 1 AMS 2.03 TI-89,
of course programming for HW 2 AMS 2.03 TI-89 would be just as good, as the
games could also be played on the HW 1 calcs (albeit, they may run slower).

Juan

----- Original Message -----
From: "Aaron Peterson" <happy_cobbler@bigfoot.com>
To: <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2000 12:23 AM
Subject: A89: What platform should we develop for?

>
> Is it easier to make a HW1 prog compatible with a HW2 calc or a HW1 prog
> with a HW2 calc.
>
> howabout 89 and 92 considerations? (89 Methinks 'cause more people have it
> and its smaller screen can be represented on the 92)
>
> (There should be no reason not to make it for AMS 2.03... or is there?)

References:

A89: >1-bit sound on the 89

From: Seth Peelle <beat@drigon.com>

A89: What platform should we develop for?

From: "Aaron Peterson" <happy_cobbler@bigfoot.com>