Results
|
Choice
|
Votes
|
|
Percent
|
No, I like my calculator as it is.
|
99
|
16.7%
|
|
No, I cannot afford another calculator.
|
72
|
12.1%
|
|
Maybe, It depends on how much improvement there is.
|
338
|
56.9%
|
|
Yes, I do not like my current calculator.
|
21
|
3.5%
|
|
Yes, I buy every calculator TI makes.
|
59
|
9.9%
|
|
I do not have a TI calculator right now.
|
5
|
0.8%
|
|
|
Re: Would you buy another TI calculator?
|
Sebastian Reichelt
|
Why does it seem that some people never have enough of their computers and calculators? In my opinion, TI has done a pretty good job on their programmable calculators.
BTW: First comment!
|
Reply to this comment
|
16 April 2000, 18:58 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Would you buy another TI calculator?
|
Paulo Marques
(Web Page)
|
"Just compare theis screens with those on simple toys such as the gameboy!"
Does the word calculator mean anything to you?
"We would like screens without the strong glares that makes the TI-92 so hard to read,"
Yeah, I guess that could be improved.
"higher resolution on all graphic calculators."
Not really needed, but It will definitly keep improving
"colors etc.etc."
Again, CALCULATOR! What do I want colors for? It would be nice, but necessary? Came on, would it be worth the price?
"You have just began to make useable calculators. So please, keep up the good work for many years ahead!"
err.... We? TICALC has nothing to do with Texas Instruments... And TI has been making calculators for quite a while, and their definitly best than the competition, period.
Cd_Slayer
|
Reply to this comment
|
20 April 2000, 18:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Would you buy another TI calculator?
|
Paul Schippnick
(Web Page)
|
The HP calculators seem to be well built. I like my HP-48GX. But I believe the TI-89 (I only have a TI-92 at this time) is better and easer to do the symbolic stuff. The HP-48G series does support algebraic input and has algebraic display, which the TI "Pretty Print" format is simular (I think better and smarter). The HP-20S is a stricly algebric scientific calculator. Looks good, has the same type of accuracy as the more expensive HPs. But HP has come out with a low cost calculator. Not any better then any other low cost calculators, but it is an HP-6S. I saw it in two stores, in one store the solar version was $15.95. In another store non-solar version $9.99. Yes, HP-6S. It is better than a TI-30Xa or a TI-36. Those two TIs have only 3 place accuacy for 1.000000001^1000000000, which is 2.71919279. I own a TI-30X SOLAR and a TI-30Xa II. The first one has this problem the second one does not. I like both of them because PI is a top key and the TI-30X has tree memorys and unlike the TI-36 it displays the number of memories stored. Good for solving problems using the Law of Cosines. But the on key has worn-out and has become hard to turn on. The TI-30Xa II is a two line calculator, has 5 memories, algebric input on the top line. It doesn't have the logarithm bug, transecndtail error, as I call it. I use the memories instead of paper to input values to add and subtract, for X and Y coordinates, and machine setup. It is smaller and lighter then the 85. But at the computer, typing in programs, I often have both 85's at hand. That was why I bought my 86 (it can replace 3 85's). But I still haven't made the switch at work. A TI-89 would be nice. But not yet. I just bought an TI-82 on clearance, it was the last one, the display model. There going to be gone. I am going to have to order a TI-68 (not the 86) from TI directly. They (68's) are gone from all the stores TI told me would have them. And the HP I am thinking of buying is the 20S. Just under $40.
|
Reply to this comment
|
24 April 2000, 12:08 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Would you buy another TI calculator?
|
Paul Schippnick
(Web Page)
|
RPN is not as confusing to input as algebric can be with nested parenthesis. It should be noted, a TI-82,85 will give a different answer then a TI-83,86 when it comes to implied multipcation with divion. The 83,85s do the implied multipication first. The 83,86s do the implied multipication last. So if A equals 5, and the equation is 16/2A. The 82,85s give 1,6 where the 83,86s give 40 as the answer. In RPN you can't make that mistake. 16 enter 2 enter A enter * / gives 1.6 or 16 enter 2 enter / A enter * gives 40. It is stack programming, first on last off, last on first off that simple. Anyway there are 4 RPN programs for the TI-89 on this web sit under Math.
|
Reply to this comment
|
24 April 2000, 12:26 GMT
|
|
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
You can change the number of comments per page in Account Preferences.
|