Survey posted 2006-01-19 04:04 by Jon.

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

One thing that really bothers me about this site is the fact that you cannot browse through links, you have to do a search. please make a browse links page

that's a great suggestion! I was having that problem just now! It whould be a much greater convenience to the users.

What do you mean a browse links page? Do you mean a site map or something?

no, the User submitted links page....which also needs to have the 83+, 83+SE, 84+, and 84+SE categories added.

I honestly dont think ticalc needs a forum. There are enough calc forums already. Ticalc.org is a program archive and a news site. The reply system is good enough as it is.

I think the ticalc ppl should focus more on improving the quality of the archives (by stronger selection maybe). Some extra archivers would help too.

als it wuld be nice t have the ptin t nly see a certain number f prgrams per page

Is there a problem with your "o" key?

The "o" key is fine, it was the operating system.

...?

Wow, I've never seen that happen on Linux before. I don't think the keyboard driver in the kernel would do that by itself, probably something in X11 or the desktop environment...

The problem occured in mac, the "o" key worked fine when I rebooted in linux

If you try to type an 'a' in the product registration key for Windows, it won't let you. Most peculiar. I had to register a computer today at work, and I observed this. Normally I use Debian, where there is no need to type 25 letters of jibberish just to do your work.

absolutely. There are already enough calculator forums out there. Also, this and the comments to the news are forums enough!

Another thing I think there should be is the ability to browse links without having to search for them.

that was suggested by someone already (see last page)

i think the archive section should updated so that it is easier to nagigate and it should have sections from featured games to files with review

From my experience, learning Assembly for the 83+/84+ is very difficult. I think that there would be many more Ti-83+/84+ users if there were better organized tutorials. Take technoplaza's Asm and C tutorials for the 68k calcs as a good, well organized tutorial. (For me, anyway.)

I don't know how easy this would be, considering my limited expertise in the true asm field.

When you say Ti-83+/84+ users are you talking about people that use programs or people that write programs? Your wording is kind of ambiguous. Could you clarify please?

I think everyone would agree with you that better organized tutorials would be nice (this includes TI-BASIC, Assembly, and C). Unfortunately, somebody has to create those tutorials; they don't just write themselves. Writing tutorials is not very popular, so there most likely won't be any better organized tutorials unless you write them yourself.

Actually now that I think of it, I do know of two good tutorials for the Ti-83+/84+ calculators. Learn TI-83 Plus Assembly In 28 Days by Sean McLaughlin and Independent Z80 Assembly Guide by Patai Gergely are both available on this site. These two tutorials have plenty of useful Assembly information.

the problem is all the good 83+ tutorials are lumped in with 83 tutorials.....wtf is up with that?

On my computer i can not even open most archive pages because they are so large. it freezes my computer and makes it difficult to find good programs and is bad for some computers

In my opinion, I voted "Other", because:
1) Like everyone said, we need a new ticalc.org forum, and I do agree with that, so people can post message(s) about calculator-related issues, such as bugs, program updates, etc...

2) I think that there should be programs that, for example, if a stopwatch program was made for the TI-84+/SE, then it should be put in the TI-84+/SE section ONLY, and NOT the TI-83/+/SE, disregarding the "same" stuff, such as "The TI-84 Plus/Silver Edition is keystroke-for-keystroke compatible, and blah blah blah...". I mean... sure, the TI-83/84 are pretty much the same stuff, right? But, wouldn't it be confusing if, again, the stopwatch program was created for the TI-84+/SE only, and it was put in the TI-83/+/SE section? Confusing, huh? Well, I was trying to make my point, so there. :)

4) Isn't everyone forgetting how great the TI-89/Titanium/92+/Voyage 200 calculators are? I'm surprised that the TI-83/84 Series are (not to me!) probably as popular as the 68k calculators are. Oh well. That's everyone's opinion, I guess, and I respect that; however, the 84 is popular probably because of games and stuff. Which reminds me... for #5) Speaking of games, if one wants to find a certain game, let's say "Super Mario World [SMW]" that requires a certain shell for the 84... say a Flash ION shell... why not have the user put up a search for THAT particular stuff?

#6) Seperate TI-83 stuff and TI-84 stuff.

Well.... those are my thoughts.

Ultra_64

I believe the rationale (sorry, this is before me becoming a file archiver), for not splitting the directories is the files that are 84+ only (such as timerize) are an extreme minority. If we had an 84+-only directory, newbies would go to that directory, and not know that they can also use all the files in the 83+ directory.

couldn't you have every 83+ file automatically linked to the 84+ directory and the files only for the 84+ would just get put in the 84+ directory. when uploading you could be required to add a note to the achievers that said "this file is for the 84+ only because..."

I believe that is what CalcGames does.

I agree completely, the ti-83+ basic games web page is 2.2MB. I have dial up on an ancient computer and don't have the time to wait for a page that big to load. it would be nice to only see 50 results per page