Re: A89: Re: Re: Archive on HW 1.00/2.00


[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: A89: Re: Re: Archive on HW 1.00/2.00




Oh *(&$ you are right, oh well no use winging can't do anything about it.

Wesley

On Mon, 13 Dec 1999, h4X0r wrote:

> 
> Yes it gave you more FlashROM Memory, but not more Archive memory.  Run
> getConfg() and you will see that the archive size has not changed.
> 
> --h4X0r
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Wesley Moore" <s9906768@quoll.co.rmit.edu.au>
> To: <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
> Sent: Monday, December 13, 1999 8:48 PM
> Subject: Re: A89: Re: Re: Archive on HW 1.00/2.00
> 
> 
> >
> > OK mine doesn't say that but the new ROM gave me more mem?
> >
> > Wesley
> >
> > On Mon, 13 Dec 1999, h4X0r wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On the about screen (from Home Screen, press F1, Then Alpha-A) if it
> says
> > > "TI-89 Hardware Version 2.00" you have a HW 2 calc.
> > >
> > > --h4X0r
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Wesley Moore" <s9906768@quoll.co.rmit.edu.au>
> > > To: <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
> > > Sent: Monday, December 13, 1999 8:39 PM
> > > Subject: Re: A89: Re: Re: Archive on HW 1.00/2.00
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Forgive me for re-asking a fairly common question. How do you identify
> > > > whether your TI-89 is hardware v1 or 2?
> > > >
> > > > TIA
> > > >
> > > > Wesley
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, 12 Dec 1999, Bryan Rabeler wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The thing is, what Scott said is true.  Us HW1 users weren't
> cheated, at
> > > > > least not directly.  The problem is that TI implemented Flash ROM
> into
> > > their
> > > > > graphing calculators so that users could feel confident about buying
> a
> > > new
> > > > > calculator, because after the "bugs" were worked out, they could
> simply
> > > > > flash the ROM and everything would be fixed.  Then TI goes and fixes
> the
> > > > > only thing that flashing the ROM can't fix, the hardware.  Now there
> are
> > > > > essentially two versions of the TI-89 out there, and they aren't
> > > necessary
> > > > > compatible with one another.  And as time goes on, there will be
> many
> > > more
> > > > > HW2 calcs vs. HW1 calcs, and HW1 calcs will be going "obsolete".
> > > > >
> > > > > TI didn't lie, they were just very sneaky.  If they wanted to be
> really
> > > > > nice, they could offer a trade-in program.  But they won't do that,
> they
> > > > > have no reason to.  First, it would cost a lot of money, because
> they
> > > can't
> > > > > do anything with the HW1 calcs but throw them away.  Secondly, TI
> has no
> > > > > obligation do to this, and because of the fact that a majority of
> TI-89
> > > > > owners don't know the difference about HW1/HW2, the minority of us
> who
> > > do
> > > > > know the truth don't make a difference.  We are just a drop in the
> > > bucket.
> > > > >
> > > > > Bryan
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Serial" <Serial@earthlink.net>
> > > > > To: <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
> > > > > Sent: Sunday, December 12, 1999 5:58 PM
> > > > > Subject: A89: Re: Archive on HW 1.00/2.00
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > You sound like a defensive Ti Employee at a press conference. Or
> bill
> > > > > clinton perhaps.
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: Scott Noveck <noveck@pluto.njcc.com>
> > > > > To: <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
> > > > > Sent: Sunday, December 12, 1999 1:38 PM
> > > > > Subject: A89: Archive on HW 1.00/2.00
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > |
> > > > > | Now, getting back on topic - let's see the list get a little
> > > productive. .
> > > > > .
> > > > > |
> > > > > | Opinions are going to differ on whether or not TI cheated us.  I
> > > accused
> > > > > | them of doing just that in one of my emails to Paul Fischer, and
> he
> > > had a
> > > > > | good point - in TI's opinion, none of us with HW 1.00 were
> cheated.
> > > > > |
> > > > > | Instead, TI gave HW 2.00 buyers a "free upgrade" of sorts -- were
> TI
> > > > > really
> > > > > | out to cheat us, new 89s would not sell for the same price with a
> more
> > > > > | expensive 12 MHz processor.  Paul compared it to car
> dealerships --
> > > all
> > > > > they
> > > > > | do is stick on a new number for the model year, and they can
> change
> > > the
> > > > > car
> > > > > | all they want.  And they don't tell you everything that has
> changed.
> > > > > |
> > > > > | The ONLY reason TI is getting flamed like this from us is because
> of
> > > one
> > > > > | poor marketting decision - whether a calc is HW1 or HW2 is not
> > > distinctly
> > > > > | obvious at first glace.  If "HW2" was written on the calc and
> noted in
> > > big
> > > > > | print on the box.  If they called it the 89+ or the 89-2, we would
> not
> > > > > | complain.  It's all psychological -- humans, as a whole, tend to
> look
> > > at
> > > > > how
> > > > > | they were cheated rather than how they were pompered.
> > > > > |
> > > > > | Regardless, the issue could go either way.  There's simply no
> point in
> > > > > | complaining -- what's done is done/  Realize that what you say
> will
> > > have
> > > > > no
> > > > > | impact on TI whatsoever - the problem is corporate marketting,
> which
> > > will
> > > > > | not change its ways for any reason other than greed.  If you're
> going
> > > to
> > > > > | complain, do it amongst yourselves so that those of us who
> understand
> > > its
> > > > > | futility don't have to look at it (yes, I get the digest version
> of
> > > the
> > > > > list
> > > > > | and have to scroll past it to read other messages - not just
> delete it
> > > =)
> > > > > |
> > > > > |     -Scott
> > > > > |
> > > > > |
> > > > > |
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________________
> > > NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
> > > Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
> > > http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> __________________________________________
> NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
> Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
> http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
> 
> 



References: