Survey posted 2004-04-26 06:25 by Morgan.

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

The 83+/SE directory could just be renamed to "83+/84/SE" or something similar. Avoids confusion, and not redundant. Or is it not that easy?

I like that idea.

BTW, why is the 84 a plus? It's the first version of this series (if you don't count the 83). One might argue that it's a plus because of Flash, but neither the 89 or Voyage 200 are pluses... TI is so crazy.

TI-84 Plus is a plus because of the 83+. To show you what I mean. If TI releaced the 84+ under two names, TI-84 and TI-84+, which do you think would get better sales? It's all marketing.

yeah, its really an 83++, but thats kind of wierd, especially since the 83+SE is already just an 83++, so they added on in another spot, the number. But leaving it as 84 makes it less appealing and less similar looking to the 83+.
BTW, did any other calculator have a + version? I know that there was a TI-92 I and II, but were there any other pluses? I dont think so, but maybe im wrong.

Kinda off-topic, but what'll be the next calc in the 82-83-84 line? They could hardly call it 85.

Perhaps nothing? Perhaps... a GOLD edition? :)

I think it makes sense.

The TI-83 was made first. Then they decided to make another with flash. Otherwise, it's almost the same thing, so it's called the TI-83+. Then they get the SE.

Well, the TI-84+ parallels the TI-83+ much more than the regular TI-83. And likewise, the TI-84+SE parallels the TI-83+SE. If they just did TI-84 and TI-84+, I think THAT would confuse people more.

And the reason the TI-89 isn't TI-89+ is because when it was first made, it still already had flash. They didn't make another model afterwards that did, so it's just plain old TI-89. Now, I don't understand why they didn't call the TI-89Ti a TI-89+, but maybe it's because of the change in style. TI seems to like changing the look now... (just look at the TI-73 Explorer)

There really needs to be an 84 directory. If a program uses features that are ONLY available on the 84 (ie., USB link or the clock), obviously it won't run on the 83+'s. Duh.

There are features on the 83+SE that are not on the 83+, and yet they are in the same directory...

MWM

The TI-84 OS isn't transferable to the 83+. That's a major difference that, in my mind, means automatically that there should be a new set of directories.

That is a good point, and I feel foolish arguing with you about anything that has to do with calculators. :)

MWM

By the way, Michael, would you happen to know if the 84+'s have the extera RAM pages the the 83+se has?

MWM

The 84+ SE does. Dan Englender has one and confirmed that it has 128 KB.

YES!! I am working on an app the makes use of it, and I don't want it to become outdated quite yet! The 84+ will probably have it too...

MWM

What do OSes (which aren't in the ticalc archives) have to do with anything? If programs (which are in the archives) are compatible, or almost so, between the 83+ and 84+, then they can share a directory if you'd ask me.

It is true that new users would be confused and that A SMALL MOINORITY of programs would use the clock, but their are numerous reasons not to:
1) Their isn't a seperate directory for 83+ silver editon calculators and they are also compatible keystroke for keystroke (their is no need)
2) It would be redundant
3) It would be abused by prgramers seeking downloads
4) It takes up server space for an unesisary reason

Idea - about the clock, it would be easier and take less space to have a catigory for the programs with the clocks in the 83+ area

The reason that there is not a separate catagory for the TI-83+ SE is because it is very, very similar to the 83+ in terms of working hardware--the only noticeable difference is the speed.

The 84(+)--I don't know which (TI confuses me)--has more hardware than the 83+(SE) model, and sooner or later SOMEONE will write a BASIC program that utilizes the new hardware and upload it. Let's assume that there will not be a new 84(+) directory. When everyone that owns a 83+(SE) downloads the 84(+) program , there will be syntax errors all around, and everyone will complain. The same will inevitably happen with an assembly program, with much more dire errors (like RAM clears). This will stimulate more complaints, pressuring ticalc into separating 83+(SE) programs from 84(+) programs. Do not forget that non-developers download programs from this site as well as us nerds, and are bound to not to know the severities and consequences of hardware incompatability.

Not POSITIVE, but I would guess that the folks at TI might have thought about error handling with hardware differences. This would lead me to believe a TI-83p OS update might be on the way to fix any issues.

-TB

I don't see why the 83+ OS needs an upgrade (well, actually I do, but that's not 84+ related ;) ). Keep in mind that the 83+ and 84+ will have seperate OSes; you can't transfer the OS from an 83+ to an 84+ or the other way around.

Yes, but the 84+ specific BASIC stuff will still crash on a TI-83+. I guess that wouldn't be too much of a problem, but a new OS could identify these new functions (for the clock and such) and maybe give a more controlled error message, stating that the program only runs on a TI-84+.

I doubt it would crash.

At the worst, it will refuse to send

Good point... I've seen first hand how unintelligent some people who download your programs can be (and I'm sure many others have too).

I still think my favorite was the one where some guy thought his batteries died when really the calculator was waiting for him to press Enter (Pause command).