Re: Ti-89 Died

To: CALC-TI@LISTS.PPP.TI.COM
Subject: Re: Ti-89 Died
From: Tom <tomgNOSPAM@NORTHCOAST.COM>
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 20:17:19 GMT
Organization: http://www.supernews.com, The World's Usenet: Discussions Start Here
References: <363cac26.690894@news.northcoast.com> <19981101150126.08675.00002016@ng143.aol.com>
Reply-To: Tom <tomgNOSPAM@NORTHCOAST.COM>
Xref: paladin.american.edu bit.listserv.calc-ti:26171

On 1 Nov 1998 20:01:26 GMT, stl137@aol.com (STL137) wrote:

>I grew up in the days when you COULDN'T flash a BIOS. There *should* be
>protection against that.

I'm real proud of you.  But we live in today, not in your yesterdays.
Again, you are spewing what you think, not what is.  I know it's tough
for you, but let's try to stick to todays reality.


>Did I ever say that writing to EEPROM was impossible? Nope. Writing to ROM
*is*
>impossible.
Except for this:
On 1 Nov 1998 07:23:47 GMT, stl137@aol.com (STL137) wrote:
>For the EEPROM to be rewritten... a series of electrical impulses must be sent
>to it. Hrm. Now, everyone knows that *that's* impossible, right?
>Messing with the EEPROM is bad, but not unrecoverable.
It's just a quote from you.  Looks to me like you said writing to
EEPROM was impossible.  If you don't believe me, reread your message.

As for ROM, writing to that too is possible, otherwise the ROMs in all
our calcs would be empty.

>Two words: eat that.

Follow-Ups:

Re: Ti-89 Died

From: ToddEStan <toddestn@NOSPAM.VISI.COM>

References:

Re: Ti-89 Died

From: Tom <tomgNOSPAM@NORTHCOAST.COM>

Re: Ti-89 Died

From: STL137 <stl137@AOL.COM>

Prev: TI-89 tick marks when graphing help!
Next: Re: Incorrect temp CONV on 86 - known problem?
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread