A89: Re: Re: pissed off, part 2
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
A89: Re: Re: pissed off, part 2
In maybe a year or so, the hardware v1 will be outdated and the flow of
programs for hw v1 will decrease. I think TI ,at least, should offer
information about hw v2 . They make a calc that will never be replaced just
to replace it after less than 2 years. And they don't even give information
about it to the people who spent good money to purchase their calc.
Anyways, that's just my little opinion that probably doesn't mean
anything. I'll go back into my little corner and busily work on
procrastinating.
Regards,
Eric Greening
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Wood <thedew@usit.net>
To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
Date: Tuesday, November 23, 1999 1:19 PM
Subject: A89: Re: pissed off, part 2
>
>You have every right to be pissed, as do all owners of the ti-89. I'm
>guessing that he is withholding key information that he knows you need, and
>won't admit it.
>
>-Dan(TI-89 HW1, Rom 1.0 Owner)
>thedew@usit.net
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Scott Noveck <noveck@pluto.njcc.com>
>To: <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
>Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 1999 2:36 PM
>Subject: A89: pissed off, part 2
>
>
>>
>> My reply:
>>
>> > I have been instructed to refer your questions to the customer
>> >service center; and that my job tasks and descriptions do not go
outside
>> >the scope of the TI-83 Plus.
>>
>> Can't I get in contact with someone who at least understands the
technical
>> details of the calculator? A friend of mine tried calling customer
>service
>> to figure out what was changed with the 89 hardware/firmware upgrade, and
>> the representative tried to tell him it had more memory. When my friend
>> explained that this is not the case, the representative apparently kept
>> insisting it was true with little knowledge of. . . well, anything.
>>
>> > May "I" recommend that you have a bit of
>> >patience; the '92+ SDK is in process & your questions would be
>appropriate
>> >for the staff of that SDK.
>>
>> Is there any way I could get in touch with the SDK writers directly
>sometime
>> soon? It's already been delayed from the early December release that was
>> promised back in _May_, certainly a long enough time to prepare the
>> materials and a promise that should not have been made if it was that far
>> from being fulfilled.
>>
>> > You may also attempt of interface with
>> >additional peers in the TI-89/92/92+ programming community; they may be
>> >able to assist.
>>
>> I have tried; every single one of them agrees that the program I had
>should
>> activate grayscale properly on either version of the 89 according to the
>> information you provided me with. Even a special version of the popular
>> emulator that was designed to work like a new 89 based on the changes you
>> listed. Something crucial is missing and programs won't work without it.
>.
>> .
>>
>> > I not attempting to ignore you or your questions; but much of
>> >what your asking is sensitive, both internally and externally, for
>several
>> >reasons, some of which I'm not probably not even aware of..... I do not
>> >know if this sensitivity is company-to-company competition; current or
>> >prior legal tests of propritary software trademarks/copyrights and
>> >changes in this status if released "external to the corporation"; ;
"too
>> >many" questions on 92+ behaviors coupled with too few staff; or several
>> >other reasons. In any case, I cannot assist regarding questions outside
>> >the scope of the TI-83 Plus. My apologies,... I'm sorry.
>>
>> Is it not fair to ask what has been changed in the new calculators? Both
>> the web site and the calculator packaging claimed that the calculator
>would
>> ALWAYS be UP TO DATE because it can always be upgraded via Flash ROM.
>There
>> are many people who demand a trade-in for their old calculators, since
>those
>> have a security error which makes them vulnerable AND do not run as fast.
>>
>> At the very least, we have a right to know what has been changed. Your
>> previous correspondence was helpful, but it was definately missing
>something
>> important that prevents this program from working. At the very least
>> someone could take that source and get it to work, no further questions
>> asked - I doubt that there's anything "sensitive" that a simple screen
>page
>> flipping interrupt would reveal that couldn't be found by studying the
>ROM.
>> All I want to do is get this thing to flash a two-plane, four-color
>> grayscale picture with minimal CPU usage. . .
>>
>> -Scott
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Follow-Ups: