A89: Re: Re: A new cake of s**t?

To: <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
Subject: A89: Re: Re: A new cake of s**t?
From: "Brian Maxwell" <bmaxwell@remc11.k12.mi.us>
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2000 00:18:10 -0400
References: <200007011236.e61Caer15044@neretvica.utic.net.ba> <001101bfe555$4e5f1be0$51d7c540@default>
Reply-To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org


According to an response to an email I sent TI, the limit is so that people
won't run flash applications in RAM.  Could some one tell me how some one
would do this?  Since aren't flash apps encrypted, or is that just the
certificates?

----- Original Message -----
From: "James Darpinian" <J112282@prodigy.net>
To: <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 9:14 PM
Subject: A89: Re: A new cake of s**t?


>
> A cake of s**t?
>
> I think it loses something in the translation, Zeljko.
>
>     First of all, I understand you must be angry that your work is being
> messed up by TI, but remember, it's their ROM, their calculator, their
> everything.  If it wasn't for TI, there wouldn't be an 89.
>
>     On the other hand, they are just stupid to completely ignore the TI
> programming community, because we add TONS of value to their product.  I
> mean, the large library of games is a major reason for buying expensive
> graphing calculators at my school.  TI should be grateful to us, but they
> don't even acknowledge us, much less listen to us.  TI should stop
delaying
> and release their SDK and assembly information (the delays are most likely
> due to MaxMem and HW2patch, and if they cared at all about us, they
wouldn't
> have put in the limitations that these programs defeat).
>
>     I don't know why TI's OS design seems so stupid.  Many things in TI-OS
> are very stupid, such as the 8 (now 24) Kb limit, and the extreme slowness
> of things in general.  The internal design of the OS, although flexible,
> sacrifices too much speed, in my opinion.  If TI's AMS was as fast as
> Hewlett Packard's, TI-89s would run probably 2-4 times faster than HP
calcs
> because of the faster processor.  Then there's TI's redesign of parts of
the
> OS, which probably resulted in those routines being taken out.  These
> redesigns have not made TI-OS any better, so why is TI doing them?  TI
> should spend its time making TI-OS _better_!  Adding useful features, and
> optimizing, and such.  They should pay attention to us and not change
things
> at random in TI-OS.
>
> > I want to see your comments...
>
> Well, there they are.  Anybody else up for commenting on TI's "cakes of
> s**t?"
>
> James Darpinian
>
>

Follow-Ups:

A89: Re: Re: Re: A new cake of s**t?

From: "Jean Canazzi" <jcanazzi@cybercable.fr>

References:

A89: A new cake of shit in AMS 2.04

From: "Zeljko Juric" <zjuric@utic.net.ba>

A89: Re: A new cake of s**t?

From: "James Darpinian" <J112282@prodigy.net>