Re: Why are TI Calcs so inferior?
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Yes, and it would be banned even more so than current TI-92.
"This is the most logical route, Captain"
-= Zenon@bbs.nexes.com =-
----------
: From: griffon@THE-LAIR.COM
: To: Zenon
: Subject: Re: Why are TI Calcs so inferior?
: Date: November 14, 1996 7:47 PM
:
:
: 1. You don't need that much power just to graph a simple linear equation
: 2. All of that hardware would need lots of batteries.
: 3. All of that hardware would give out a lot of heat (especially the 486
: processor)
: 4. If you want all that, just get a Psion, Newton, or Pilot PDA.
:
: Sure it sounds pretty cool but it could never be marketed as a
: junior-high/high school calculator.
:
: --
:
: Riley McArdle
: griffon@the-lair.com
: http://www.toptown.com/hp/griffon/
:
: Goatboy <lcappite@sprynet.com> wrote in article
: <328b645b.582990@news.sprynet.com>...
: > I've been looking over the tech specs for all the TI calculators, and
: > I can't argue that these calculators are spectacular. They are the
: > most ingenious pieces of equipment for school use and such. However,
: > they're hardware is very inferior. The hard disk so to speak only is
: > about 30K. The processor runs at 6MHz? It only has an assembly
: > language, not something better? My gosh, on today's technology, hd
: > space is 6 *cents* a meg? And hard drives are the size of a TI calc.
: > If u shrink down the hd to that of a mini cassette, and put it in the
: > TI, u could get about 1/3 a gig. And you could probably do better,
: > because I've seen a mini cassette for the computer that holds a gig,
: > and the drive it goes in to is only 1 cm bigger on each side. And the
: > chip? The 486 chips are like $30 bucks nowadays, and they run at
: > 66MHz. AMD chips are $75 for a 133MHz version. And the display screen.
: > I've seen sony watchman that were smaller and they have a color screen
: > at 320x200.
: >
: > Basically, what I'm saying is with today's current technology and its
: > cheapness, TI could probably come out with a calculator that could
: > outperform my computer (mine is a 486 DX2-50) for the same price as
: > their 92, and I don't know why they aren't trying.
: >
: >
References: