Re: Why not the TI-92?


[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Why not the TI-92?



The TI-92 is also not allowed on most tests such as th SATs due to the
QWERTY Keyboard

On Thu, 28 May 1998, Andrew Lewis wrote:

> On Wed, 27 May 1998 05:42:25 GMT, autumn_storms@hotmail.com (Midnight
> Wells) wrote:
>
> >Hi All,
> >
> >I've been lurking in this group for some time and I'm a little bit
> >confused about the 'which is my favourite calculator thread.'
> >
> >What is confusing me is that there appear to be very few responses
> >listing the TI-92 as the favourite calculator -- and, given that it
> >appears to be the calculator with all the bells and whistles, this is
> >not what I expected.
> >
> >I know nothing about the TI calculators nor do I understand complex
> >mathematics, but I guess I just assumed people would naturally favour
> >the 'latest and greatest.' Can anyone explain why so many people are
> >opting for TI-86s and so on?
> >
> >BTW, I am contemplating pursuing studies in statistics -- can anyone
> >tell me if the TI-92 is suitable for statistical calculations? Forgive
> >me if this is a silly question.
> >
> >Many thanks,
> >
> >Midnight.
>
>         Technical superiority does not always make a device any
> individual person's favorite.  The TI-92 may have a processor twice as
> fast as an 8x and a much bigger display, but I personally find it to
> be rather, well, kludgey.  This is very subjective, but it is my
> opinion and I know of many people that share it.  It is large, but
> that means it is also bulky.  There are way too many buttons, and the
> orginization is not as logical as one might  think.  And despite all
> the  keys, some functions are still buried in menus.  The display
> seems extremely dim and making out things is quite difficult.
>
>         Some of these things are probably just due  to my own
> ignorance, and obviously some people will consider the  design format
> to be a plus.  And the QWERTY keyboard helps for text entry.  But
> guess what.   I have a computer if I need something with lots of
> bloated, overly glitzy software and  a qwerty keyboard.  And you can
> get pdas with regular keyboards that are much smaller than the  TI-92,
> which also have more memory, faster processors, etc.
>
>         I don't like my TI-86 because it is the most feature packed
> calculator ever made, or the  fastest.  Because it isn't.  But it is
> very straightforward, and has all the built in functions I will be
> needing to use in the near future.  I can cram it with 85k of games
> and still use it in class without any major crashes.  And the display
> has wonderful  contrast.  That is my opinion, not an empirical fact.
>
>         I am sure to some people the TI-92 is perfect, and they would
> quite rightly point out that the 8x series is based on a processor
> from the seventies, with tiny illegible displays, meager built in
> functionality, and a keypad which makes text entry more or less
> impossible.  And they are right, too.
>
>         For that matter, you  could make a case for the TI-80.  I
> mean, it is very compact, and straightforward.  Certainly if that is
> all you need you shouldn't go  out and buy a Cray supercomputer, or a
> TI-92.
>
> -Andy
>


References: