Re: 83 vs. 85

Subject: Re: 83 vs. 85
From: Dave Wollenberg <dave_w@NEXXUS.NOVASYS.COM>
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 20:14:10 -0400
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.94.961005120345.13295A-100000@ursa>

On Sat, 5 Oct 1996, Jon Niehof wrote:


> The reason so many math departments support the 82 (and
> now the 83) is that TI tried to get math instructors involved
> in the design of the 82.
> What's more, the average person does not want to put the
> effort into learning the 85. I admit the 85 has a rather
> steep learning curve, but it isn't all *that* bad, and
> once you've learned your way around, it's far easier and
> faster to use than the 82.
> The reason that I would go 85 instead of 83 is sheer
> flexibility--strings, infinite numbers of lists, constants,
> etc. etc.  The 85 is meant to be a *very* flexible calculator.
>


The 83 can do strings, and can also have an infinite number of lists,
which you can name (although the 82 has neither.) There are no constants
unfortunatly.

References:

From: