Re: A better calculator, for what?

To: CALC-TI@LISTS.PPP.TI.COM
Subject: Re: A better calculator, for what?
From: Bill Risher <billr1@MIDSOUTH.NET>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 15:31:57 -0500
In-Reply-To: <36111741.482DD680@math.unc.edu>
References: <361071A3.7D8832B3@mindless.com>
Reply-To: Bill Risher <billr1@MIDSOUTH.NET>

At 01:22 PM 09/29/98 -0400, you wrote:
>thesis about the role of certain kinds of games.) What more is it that
>you want that the 82 or 83 doesn't provide, and why?  And why wouldn't
>this "more" be better provided by a CAS on a PC?
Well, I dont feel up to writing the full explanation for 86vs89, but the
major reasons to get an 86 over an 83 (lets just leave the 85 and 82 out of
the discussion, as they have been CLEARLY superceded) are the SIMULT, POLY,
and SOLVER functions(the 83 solver is too hard to use imho).  And dont
forget all the extra stuff under GRAPH|MATH.

--
Bill Risher        Sparr      UIN:1952775    ._, . . .
Lorenai #44        Makra      FON:9316484164 |_) o | |
Overlord n7hq      Decius                    |_) | | |
mailto://billr1@midsouth.net  FAX:9315526807 ^ ` ^ ^ ^

References:

What should I get?

From: Damastermind <damastermind@MINDLESS.COM>

A better calculator, for what?

From: Ladnor Geissinger <geissing@MATH.UNC.EDU>

Prev: [Q] Assembly on ti85 ?
Next: 83 Term Program
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread