Survey posted 1999-12-12 06:58 by Andy.

Contribute ideas to surveys by sending a mail to survey@ticalc.org.

If programs are written using the SDK, then changes to the ROM will only require a re-compile. Well, that's assuming the author uses supported calls. I think TI should be allowed to add functionality to the calculator. If not, then they could have just done away with the flash concept. As for HP using a posted list of ROM entry points... That's easy when you have a static ROM! Remember, the HP48 didn't (still doesn't) have a flash ROM.

Let's be real. How often do we hear PC programmers complain about ROM updates? O.K. Compare that to the number of sweeping ROM changes that have been made since the release of the PC. WOW. Kinda puts it into perspective, huh?

Let the fun begin,
Tip DS

Hey....HP released a supported entry points list for the HP49G too, the ROM versions changed several times, but the entry points didn't.

Making static entry points even if actual programs move is easy: instead of putting the routine directly where the rom call should be, we put a goto at this place. And the gotos never move, only the address they send the processor to do.

As simple as that.

Damn Homer! And I always thought you were just a stupid under-achieving nuclear technician! That's a dawg-gone good thought! I'm on the band-wagon now. Comm'on TI, make static entry points!!!!!

Converted,
Tip DS

This Homer fellow has a good idea, we should all write to TI asking for this "feature."

>And I always thought you were just a stupid under-achieving nuclear technician!

Hey... I am!

>Comm'on TI, make static entry points!!!!!

It's better than this; I couldn't believe there are no static entry points. Of course, avoiding gotos (which makes entry points mobile) might speed up the OS a little, but if TI actually plans to release flashapps, it seems to me that they *have* to use static entry points. I've been very surprised to see there is a different release of EEpro for v2.03 Maybe this means there are actually no static epoints yet? Puzzling.

I think TI released a new version of EE-Pro because of the new support for flash apps. I'm pretty sure the old EE-Pro installed as an OS update, because the TI page makes reference to "AMS 1.00, AMS 1.05, and AMS with EE-Pro" or something like that. Having flash apps install as OS updates means that you can only have one flash app on the calc at a time, or that TI would have to make OS images with all the possible flash app combinations installed and then coordinate the distribution, which would be a big pain for the payware flash apps. The new version probably installs as a flash app under AMS and that's why it needed to be rewritten.

(please excuse me if i've got this all wrong)
If the SDK lets you program in C for the 89, TI is going to have to come up with an include file that will contain all the calc's functions. It is probable that the functions will be linked to the ROM addresses in some way...all someone has to do is find out how they are linked and you could probably use this info in ASM programming.

Actually!! It doesn't put into perspective at all! PC's use software interrupts so programmers don't need to know ROM entry points. The interrupt numbers are standardised and havn't changed apart from the addition of new functions. In fact this is the PC's equivilent of a static entry table. Look at Dynamic Link Libraries (DLLs), they have entry point table stored in them containing the location of each function. Imagine having to reinstall every single program on your computer every time a new version of a DLL was released. The same goes for any other Program/OS/Device Driver that provides functions for applications. The interface is nearly always unchanging from version to version. If TI are going to make a caluculator capeable of running ASM programs, then they should support ASM programs properly and this means a startic entry table for ROM calls.

I believe that although this new 2.03 TI-89 revision is a "good thing", it was inappropriate for Texas Instruments to make us have to buy their SDK to be able to program it with programs >8k. It puts undue stress on programmers to charge for their programs, and then on us, the consumers, we bought this calculator for one (or both) of two reasons, we needed it for our math class, or we wanted more gaming power than before. This is a hobby for most of us, and I, for one, would hate to see it become a market. I think that we should boycott TI's new TI-89 SDK when it comes out (at least the one they charge you for) and spend our time trying to hack the TI-89 and free it up. It can't be that hard to get past, or even decrypt the encrypted checksum, or even create our own TI-89 OS's!! Imagine: Doors89.89u! We can do it, and teach TI a lesson at the same time. I am also prepared to try to hack ANY for sale programs made by third party developers that are placed in the pay-ware or even share-ware catagory. I think we can beat this! We beat Micro$oft, so why not T!? Well, that's just my opinion, anyone who is interested please e-mail me!! Any Flames e-mail "TIcares".
:)

That's just my 2.8938957349 cents worth.

>I believe that although this new 2.03
>TI-89 revision is a "good thing",

I'm under the impression that it doesn't add any new functionality... Does it? All it does, imho, is improve the ID checking system (that didn't even really exist before).

Of course we shouldn't buy TI's SDK. By the way, I don't think calculator programs would be very successful if they weren't free. I don't know what they were thinking.

>I think we can beat this! We beat Micro$oft,
>so why not T!?

We can... Although I don't think it would be possible for us to write a real OS (an os that does multiplication, or that evaluates expression with parens!), it would be a good thing we had enough documentation to do so.

>That's just my 2.8938957349 cents worth.

:o) good one!

why not even work on cracking the SDK, it is posible

wow. There sure are alot of people who are pissed off. If you dont like the new AMS, then just use the old version. Ti has more of a responsibility to the productive aspects of the calculator (ie. math) than it does games, which are considered to be largely disruptive by your teachers. And for those people who think that TI should cater to the gaming community, do you actually realize what a small percentage of the market we account for. The only thing that the gaming community has going for it is bimonthly newspaper article that comes out in a regional newspaper heralding a popular TI website.

>If you dont like the new AMS, then just use the old version

I don't think anyone here said they didn't like the new OS, at least I don't say so, but rather they said it wasn't good enough! We're waiting for something new for months, and what does TI give us? Nothing! I've read the list of improvements and new features, and I couldn't seem to find anything really interesting.

However, we could think some things are really going to be improved. The catalog, for example, now uses a bigger font (on the 89 - I don't know about the 9x), and seems to be ready to give additional help about each comment (currently, it gives exactly the same amount of help it did from the beginnig; what arguments are expected). Maybe we should wait, and see what they give us.

I think that continued upgrades is a good thing for TI to go after. Even if it enfringes on the abilities of certain games and assembly programs. There are several reasons why.

1- The games constantly have to be updated.
2- Gaming is a small part of the power of the TI Calculator.
3- New functionalbility and an improved user interface (I love the new Var-Link folder capabilities over the 1.x versions. Now all we need is multiple levels of file management.)
4- TI can fix and add to the calculators functions (such as the geometry for the 89, perhaps a clock on the Main screen for the 89, 92Plus, the ability to do more than one 3d equation at a time, and new flash applications)

Even though it might temporarily mess up the games. The new math and production features are worth the inconvenience.

However, I still with the people who say that TI should publish a list of constant entries to the system and keep them constant (this is the long "I Also Agree, I Agree Also" list above.)

Hell no. I was severely dissapointed when my v2.03 upgrade destroyed my doorsOS kernel and wouldn't let me reinstall it. I loved the shell bolt, and now I can't SB my calc so that it turns itself off. The new features are cool, but the lack of ASM support (especially with me trying to learn 68K) makes it a serious suck-fest

...and suddenly, we realise the difference between an 86 and an 85.

What is that supposed to mean?

I think that TI SHOULD upgrade the sys mem for fixes, etc. TI makes CALCULATORS!!! NOT GAMEBOYS!!! Now: I dont think they should release them too often if it causes certain existing functions to work inccorectly. These guys are here for us. We should be glad 89 has a flash feature. If you have to, there are such things as basic games, that work almost as good as asms. If you want your asms, dont upgrade! Its that simple.

Most BASIC Games suck on all calculator. From the 71 to the 92 plus they mostly suck. Basic is only good for slow pased programs. Thats why nintendo did not make their gameboy run basic programs, basic is very limited. ASM is what is needed for anything to run at high speeds. Though I agree about the Calculator not a gameboy statement.

isn't it 73 to 92+? :P

also, 73 has no other platform for gaming other than basic (except ti flash apps, which cost mula), and I doubt it ever will, unless it's hackable or ti included assembly support for it. (which probably isn't true.)

besides, basic is probably better for math programs than games

anyway basic sucks for games with graphics.

I hate it when you ASM guys think that ASM is always more capable, because that's not always true. The only instances where that is *always* true is for special variable types and shutdown/off features.
Graphic Calculators are not gaming systems, in ASM or BASIC.
- THE PRESERVATION OF BASIC IS UPON US... -

Face it man, ti graphing calculators *are* in fact gaming systems.... they are systems that play games, so therfore they are.

They wern't meant to be, but thats what they became because programmers made it that way. Besides whats the harm with having a few games on your calc to play every now and then?

Yes, they are also math tools, thats another one of the great things about these devices, they can help tackle hard math problems, while at the same time being a way to pass time.

I don't see the sense in trying to /preserve/ BASIC programs. They will always be around, thats pretty much a fact in itself. I don't think that BASIC "sucks", I just think that its
r e a l l y s l o w . . . . .
especially when you use your calculator for gaming purposes. Now, if you want to make a quick program that will crunch some formulas for ya, BASIC would be the way to go. I have a geometry program on my calc that has several formulas that have really helped me with homwork (I'm an honest person, I don't use it to cheat). It's writted in BASIC. I've once programmed a stupid race game in BASIC, it was slow as crazy and eventually got deleted because I realized it would never amount to anything.

Right now I am trying to learn Asm for my 83+, so those users can have a few for games [like they don't have enough as it is =P]

So theres my 2 and a half cents worth, =)

~Jonathan Taylor

This Guy Takes BASM to seroiusly, I mean come on people ASM is better than BASIC. Face it. SOme people r to lazy to learn ASM

Basic == ASM!!!

I am a basic and beginer asm programer.
I use the asm programs to put the pictures fast on the sceen and it interfafes with the basic program. in fact the basic program works faster that ways.
Basic programs can do high math programs and can't crash the caculator. (Thank god).

I Am NOT a lazy person.

also for all you people who think basic suxs...
example:
Zelda for TI 89! was writeen in BASIC!!!!!
so there. =P

Best hopes to all u programers out there...
Scincerly,
FoxBoy

Also every calculator has some form of assembly capability, otherwise it would not turn on or off from the on key; come to think of it, the calculator wouldn't even work.

Mhh. Guess what, most calculator actually have a microprocessor! You can break your calc and get it out if you wish.

Problems arise when you are unwilling to blow things up and do not want to lose your calculator's... calculating capabilities.

So the screen on my TI-89 is better than that on my gameboy.

First off, WHO IN THEIR MIND WOULD PAY SO MUCH FOR A CALCULATOR AND NOT USE IT AS ONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Basic and Assembly are languages that are made to be tools; people make programs with these tools; some of these programs are games. People put time and learned a lot just so you can use a program. Granted, some people are sick and only use their calculators as gameboys. Many people develop and test programs to make others happy. Programming a game can be more challenging if not incomperable with making a math or science program. Thank you all programmers fro bringing us your programs, they have made life easier.