Re: Why are TI Calcs so inferior?


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

Re: Why are TI Calcs so inferior?



In article <328b645b.582990@news.sprynet.com>, lcappite@sprynet.com
(Goatboy) wrote:


>I've been looking over the tech specs for all the TI calculators, and
>I can't argue that these calculators are spectacular. They are the
>most ingenious pieces of equipment for school use and such. However,
>they're hardware is very inferior. The hard disk so to speak only is




It is not a hard disk, it is RAM.  Hard disks are mechanical, while RAM is
something a little different.


>about 30K. The processor runs at 6MHz? It only has an assembly
>language,


The calculator uses TI-basic, which is a simple programming language, far
superior to anything I've seen on other calculators.


>not something better? My gosh, on today's technology, hd
>space is 6 *cents* a meg? And hard drives are the size of a TI calc
>If u shrink down the hd to that of a mini cassette, and put it in the
>TI, u could get about 1/3 a gig. And you could probably do better,


Shrink down a hard drive?  What on earth are you talking about?


A hard drive for a _calculator_?   A removable cassette drive?  And that
is supposed to run off of double-a batteries?


>because I've seen a mini cassette for the computer that holds a gig,
>and the drive it goes in to is only 1 cm bigger on each side. And the
>chip? The 486 chips are like $30 bucks nowadays, and they run at
>66MHz. AMD chips are $75 for a 133MHz version. And the display screen.
>I've seen sony watchman that were smaller and they have a color screen
>at 320x200.


Do you know how much this would increase the price of the _calculator_?


The TI-92 is not supposed to be a PDA (although it can work as one), nor a
personal computer.  It is a CALCULATOR.    If you want to play games, buy
a gameboy, if you want to do sophisticated programming buy a PC, and if
you want to do things in color, use a PC.


Check out Mathematica. That might do what you want.  Get a laptop, and put
Mathematica on it.  That should make you happy.




>Basically, what I'm saying is with today's current technology and its
>cheapness, TI could probably come out with a calculator that could
>outperform my computer (mine is a 486 DX2-50) for the same price as
>their 92, and I don't know why they aren't trying.


Why bother?


The TI integrates some pretty complicated functions in less then a second.


Putting in a powerpc chip, or a pentium would make the calculator cost
hundreds of dollars more.  What difference would it make?


<pre>
--
===========================================================
 Jonathan J. Vafai                     New York University
 mailto:jjv200@acf2.nyu.edu        Computer Advocacy @ NYU
 http://pages.nyu.edu/~jjv200/           PGP + Blue Ribbon
===========================================================
</pre>


References: