Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Handhelds Education Hardware

TI Launches Three New Graphing Calculators 373

Posted by michael from the if-you-can't-make-it-good,-make-it-pretty dept.
confusedneutrino writes "Texas Instruments has announced 3 new graphing calculators to be available later this year. The TI-84 Plus and TI-84 Plus Silver Edition will be available this spring and are essentially the TI-83 Plus/SE, respectively, in a new case and with USB support. (The TI-84 Plus does sport a 15 MHz processor, compared to the TI-83 Plus' 6 MHz, though.) The TI-89 Titanium will be available in the summer and features 3x the available ROM of the 'old' TI-89 and will also have USB capability. Looks to me like a Voyage 200 minus QWERTY. I personally don't feel an inclination to upgrade at all..."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

TI Launches Three New Graphing Calculators More

TI Launches Three New Graphing Calculators

Comments Filter:

  • Plus? Plus Silver Edition? Plus/SE? Titanium? (Score:5, Funny)

    by utexaspunk ( 527541 ) on Thursday January 08, 2004 @10:51AM (#7915054)
    Who's their marketing department? AOL?

  • TI-92 (Score:5, Interesting)

    by BJZQ8 ( 644168 ) on Thursday January 08, 2004 @10:51AM (#7915060) Homepage Journal
    I still love my TI-92...While in college waiting for teachers to show up, I played lots of Tetris games on Fargo, which was the assembly-language system made possible only because of a buffer underrun...

    • Re:TI-92 (Score:4, Funny)

      by jargoone ( 166102 ) * on Thursday January 08, 2004 @10:56AM (#7915125)
      Buffer underrun? Your TI-92 had a CD burner?
      • Okay....OVERrun...or overflow, whatever you want to call it. The TI-92 allowed you to transfer data between machines, and make and restore backups. But normally this was limited to the "user" area of the calculator. By crafting some extra long strings, a buffer in the calc would overflow, and fill the normally-un-accessable "OS" area, resulting in the ability to run all sorts of assembly applications.
    • I still love my venerable TI-85. I've still got my homemade link cable (although I havn't used it in ages) and the old DOS program you need to use it. I've got zTetris and Arkanoid through Zshell (a old exploit of a hardware bug that allowed you to run assembly). I still remember when the 32k of built in memory was considered large. My favorite feature is how the calculator just _sips_ power. A set of 4 AAAs last many months in this calculator. The only thing I don't like is the Fahrenheit->Celcius

  • Common comparisons to HP not necessarily valid (Score:5, Informative)

    by klipsch_gmx ( 737375 ) on Thursday January 08, 2004 @10:51AM (#7915062)
    Many people will probably claim that HP makes better calculators that support RPN, support more features, and so on. But, unless you're a mathematician, an electrical engineer or scientist who writes modeling software, there are few occupations that require the level of math of college level classes.

    And there are many occasions where the graphing functions of my TI have proved useful in the workplace. To name a few:

    - being able to view every key I've entered before evaluating the expression

    - being able to revise and edit incorrect expressions

    - to determine linear regression fits for data sets

    - to perform functions like logarithms and square roots on said data sets, in order to linearize them (linearity being checked, of course, by the R^2 correlation of my fit)

    - anything at all to do with linear algebra, especially solving systems of equations or matrix manipulations. RREF is a bitch by hand.

    For more "pure" math (like Diff. Eq.), I agree that pencil and paper are generally easier. But any applied math (a.k.a. engineering) requires an insane amount of busy work that could not be handled with a puny scientific calculator. I know you said Engineering and Physics are different stories, but everything I just wrote could certainly apply to all sciences (even the "soft" ones like Psych. and Sociology), or anything at all requiring data collection.

    For the record, I use a TI-86 daily at a bio-tech job. It has the stats capabilities of the 83, plus all the good parts of the 85.

    • Both the TI-92 and the TI-89 have symbolic manipulation. Completely invaluable for performing integration and differentiation quickly, especially with trancendentals like pi, e, sqrt(2), etc.
      • It would have been banned in one of my maths classes (since my bro is taking the class now and it is) but it was a godsend. I picked up a few in Canada because it hadn't been released in the uk at that point.

        One of my lecturers jaw literally dropped when i showed it performing some complex integration that he'd spent 10 minutes doing by hand, in a single step and complete with greek symbols.

        I don't really buy the argument that it's 'cheating' to have a calc like that. Learning how to master your calculato

    • Re:Common comparisons to HP not necessarily valid (Score:4, Informative)

      by RadioheadKid ( 461411 ) on Thursday January 08, 2004 @11:00AM (#7915175)
      I'm an electrical engineer, and I've been using my TI-85 for over ten years now. I think it's just a matter of personal preference. The RPN users were definetly in the minority in all my engineering, math and science classes, if there were any at all.

      • This does not say much...

        First, it can be safely assumed that almost ALL people who use RPN also know how to use old "algebraic" calculators. Yet they still use RPN.

        I do not know of ANYBODY who became proficient with RPN who prefers algebraic calculators.

        The reason that RPN is dying is because HP was the only company making RPN calculators, and they are not very competetive now. You have a shelf full of calcuators, and the shiny TI machines are brand new, and at a good price. The HP one (if they have one) may have been sitting there for a while, and simply cannot compete on such things as screen resolution and memory.

        • You have a shelf full of calcuators, and the shiny TI machines are brand new, and at a good price. The HP one (if they have one) may have been sitting there for a while, and simply cannot compete on such things as screen resolution and memory.

          I've been using my HP 48SX since '93 or so. Back then it cost something like $300. Its an amazing calculator, a lot like having Matlab and a symbolic solver in the palm of your hand, but as the years go by I kept thinking that one day its going to break and I won'

    • I cannot use any calculator besides my HP48G (aka secret weapon) any more. If I have to balance my checkbook and do not have secret weapon with me, then I do it by hand. No TI calculator will work for me.
  • The TI-84 Plus, the TI-84 Plus Silver Edition, the TI-83 Plus/SE, the TI-89 Titanium, this is all too confusing. Just tell me hich one of these looks like Kristanna Loken, and where can I pick one up.

    I need to do me some computin' on a beautiful calculator bent on the complete destruction of mankind. And I want USB support, too, dang it!

    --

    Was it the sheep climbing onto the altar, or the cattle lowing to be slain,
    or the Son of God hanging dead and bloodied on a cross that told me this was a world condemned, but loved and bought with blood.
  • I'll happily buy one or both of these calculators for my school-age children, provided that they can run TI Linux [ticalc.org]. Frankly, I have grown weary of the proprietary, closed-source interfaces that plague graphing calculators. They're essentially small computers; can't they run a real OS?

    Sincerely,
    Seth Finklestein
    Linux on Calculators Expert
    • And they have USB. You know what that means? Wifi and lynx in the middle of math class. Oh yeah!
    • I will bite at your hook.

      I don't know the name of the project, but someone is actually developing an open-source firmware package for the TI-89/92/V200 series to get around certain coding limitations in the standard OS. TICalc.org should have info, and I believe it was on Slashdot a few weeks ago.

  • Why not a PDA? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 08, 2004 @10:51AM (#7915067)
    Why not a PDA that runs graphing calculator software instead?
    • TEachers won't dig that. It was hard enough to get teachers to accept graphing calculators at all, let alone something that teachers will see as a full-fledged computer.

      Of course, all it means is that the teachers have to give tests that prove you know HOW to do something with formulae, not just that you can memorize them. I always hated that "Memorize the first four pages of your integral table book" shit. If it's a common integral, you remember it. If it's not, well, that's why they wrote the book. P

      • I use my PDA as my mathematic tool as well as for taking all of my notes in class, upper division math and biology courses mostly. I've not had a problem using a PDA on a test since I started trying. Granted, I usually discuss it with the prof first, rather than just whip it out and hope they don't notice. For a couple of profs, I've had to give them my memory card so that I don't have my class notes with me, though there is no reason I couldn't just as easily have them internally and usually do. Makes som

    • Re:Why not a PDA? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Slack3r78 ( 596506 ) on Thursday January 08, 2004 @11:10AM (#7915290) Homepage
      I posted on this the last time the issue of graphing calculators came up - namely when HP announced their new line. The biggest reason being that the graphing calculator interface on a PDA will suck compared to the Real Deal (TM). Having to dig through 8 layers of menus to find the function you want simply doesn't cut it when you just want to get work done. This is the reason why despite owning a top of line line desktop and a fairly decent laptop, I'll still be purchasing an HP-49G+ in the near future - either of the computers has much more power, in the case of the laptop is portable, and could run graphing calculator software, but they still wouldn't be the best tool for getting work done. I'll stick to a nice, standalone calculator and skip the all-in-one super thingamajig, thank you.

      • Re:Why not a PDA? (Score:3, Informative)

        by connorbd ( 151811 )
        Try EasyCalc... very close to the real thing. The only thing it's missing is scriptability, and since it's GPL someone could add that.

        Truth be told, some teachers like the freedom to nuke their students' calculators before tests so they can't, you know, stash answers in there. Frankly, if PDAs were allowed and teachers followed that protocol, nastiness would ensue from parents, and rightly so. Truth be told, an ARM-based PDA such as a Palm Tungsten or WinCE unit would so utterly blow away a graphing calcul
        • The only thing missing from EasyCalc compared to a powerful calculator is scripting? Pfft! Some people do more with their TIs or HPs than just graphing and arithmatic.

          EasyCalc is missing a ton of stuff compared to a real calculator, or even a good math app that can run on a desktop or PDA. Symbolic math is a start. Matrices. Solving. Calculus.
      • Hell, you can use a TI or HP emulator on your PDA if you are so concerned about menus. All the same, I've used some very good math apps on PDAs that have no menus, let alone 8 layers.
        • Dude, the point is on a graphing calculator you have a few dozen buttons that allow you to access whatever function you want quickly.

          I wouldn't mind a special keyboard for Mathematica. Of course the problem is that I still couldn't really use it because I can use a TI-89 on a test often, but usually not Mathematica.

          The other problem is that Mathematica is like the worst in closed-source software. From what I've heard, the Mathematica license easily costs my university more then the Microsoft one (and outs
    • I use a PDA for math. I started doing so using my Newton and the LittleLisp interpreter, with a bunch of functions I coded myself and some I converted from various Scheme sources. That was fine for the intro to stats class I was taking at the time, but in later classes (mathematical ecology [mmmmm], calculus), I needed something more.

      When I am using a Linux PDA, I use GNU Octave, a good Matlab clone. When I'm using WinCE, I use GNU Maxima. At first, I preferred using Octave, since I had used Matlab more,

  • I don't understand. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 08, 2004 @10:52AM (#7915075)
    Bloody hell, why must the urge to change the numbers of those calculators like that?

    WHY CANNOT THE NEW ONE BE LIKE 94?

    I don't want to remember that 83 is older than 86, but 83 plus silver-balls is never, and also faster.

    I hate this. Same thing with everything. Hell, we couldn't stick to mhz, but we had to begin with 2200+ and so on.

    At least those keep on incrementing.

  • Let me be the first to say... (Score:5, Funny)

    by HardCase ( 14757 ) on Thursday January 08, 2004 @10:52AM (#7915084)
    That they can have my HP 48GX when they pry it from my cold, dead fingers. And even then, I'm not so sure...

  • WTF? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by tuxette ( 731067 ) * <.moc.liamg. .ta. .ettexut.> on Thursday January 08, 2004 @10:52AM (#7915086) Homepage Journal
    It's the most powerful TI graphing handheld allowed for use on the AP* Calculus, AP Statistics, AP Physics, AP Chemistry, PSAT/NMSQT**, SAT(R) I , SAT II Math IC & IIC exams.

    BEWARE! "Back in the old days" rant coming...

    When I took those exams, we weren't allowed to use those fancy calculators. If we were even allowed to use calculators at all, we were only allowed to use the most basic scientific calculator you can find. No graphics, no programming, nada zip zero.

    OK, rant over. I guess the old-fashioned kind of calculator is hard to find these days. But I'm quite curious now. Have the questions been adjusted to account for use of all these fancy calculators?

    • Re:WTF? (Score:2, Informative)

      by crass751 ( 682736 )
      When I took the AP Calculus exam in 2000, there were large chunks of the exam where you couldn't use a caclulator. In the places that you could, you still had to show all work leading up to your solution.

    • You had calculators? (Score:4, Funny)

      by jabber01 ( 225154 ) on Thursday January 08, 2004 @10:59AM (#7915155)
      Back in *my* day, we were only allowed to bring in some beans on strings. And only the yuppies could affor that. The rest of us had to carry a bucket of dirt, and make little piles on our desks. And we were THANKFUL!

      Have you any idea how hard it is to compute logarithms by counting grains of dirt?

      Kids these days! Sheesh!
    • Nowadays the tests take that into consideration. The testmakers expect everyone to have a graphing calculator and design the test accordingly. You -could- get by with just a scientific calculator, but would be bogged down with a lot of busy work during the test.

      ... unless the test changed in the last 4 years (which it very well may have).

      • Nope. The best example I can think of is my linear algebra class about two years ago.

        The teacher would allow any calculator you wanted, short of a laptop (I think the the TI-92+ was okay). So you had a calculator capable of doing any matrix manipulation you needed, but if you 1) couldn't figure out how to use the Gaussian Poo Function or 2) Couldn't figure out what the answer meant in the frame of the question, you were hosed.

        This meant a lot more theoretical, no-calculating-type questions, as well as t

    • Re:WTF? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by mritunjai ( 518932 ) on Thursday January 08, 2004 @11:15AM (#7915331) Homepage
      old days ???

      Dude, you're not allowed to use any programmable calculator even in post grad courses in IITs (Indian Institute of technology) even NOW... and nobody misses them.

      As for problems involving them, we have something called "lab exercises" where usually a Solaris/Linux/WIndows box running MATLAB is at your disposal and you're supposed to solve some fairly "interesting" problems ;-)
      • Yup, neither in the university I was in until a few days back. :-)

        One of the biggest ironies in my college career was that I actually had to downgrade my "official" calc from a graphing to a "normal" scientific calculator for exams and in-class assignments even as the complexity of the problems I got kept on increasing.

        Then again, you get all the practice you want with log tables right in JEE (that's the entrance exam for IIT's bachelors programme, for all you non-Indians) itself, so... :-D

        (For the recor

    • Using an HP 49G, TI-89 or any high end calculator in those tests is probably going to slow you down with menus and multi-line displays.

      I used an HP32SII when taking the SATs. It's a very practical programmable single line RPN. It obviously doesn't have any graphing, matrix or symbolic calculus capabilities, but it still satisfies most of my needs (I'm now a 4th year EE student). It's also a mean dice roller for D&D sessions :)

      For all the rest I use either an HP 49G, Matlab, Octave or Maple.
    • When I took the SAT in 2000 we were allowed to have the graphing calculators on certain portions of the test - but the memory had to be reset before the test and we had to do it while they watched. Some people I know lost alot of games that way. But as it turned out, there was nothing on the test that at most you would have needed a scientific calculator for (For the recored I used a TI-30X IIS (Two line scientific). In college the same thing applied in Calc I & II. But the catch is this: the TI-83 (Or

    • Have the questions been adjusted to account for use of all these fancy calculators?

      One of the questions I got when I took Math IIC was this:-

      sin x = cos x. x =?

      To this day, I suspect ETS presumed test-takers would plot both graphs (ie, y = sin x, y = cos x) on their TI's, see where they intersect, and then search for at least one of the results to be one of the solutions.

      Then again, I never had a high opinion of fellow test-takers especially in math and science; kinda tells you why I'm a regular here

      • Re:WTF? (Score:3, Informative)

        by Bishop ( 4500 )
        Dear god man! You can do this in your head. If you are having trouble, draw both functions on a scrap of paper.

        x = pi/4 + n*pi

        n is any integer.

    • Re:WTF? (Score:2, Interesting)

      by NegativeK ( 547688 )
      Have the questions been adjusted to account for use of all these fancy calculators?

      Absolutely. The test has been adjusted quite well for those calculators.. If you know how to use a TI-89, you can get at least a four. The questions seemed like they were designed for 89/92 gurus.. I'm a math major now, and I knew my stuff back then, but that test (AP Calculus BC) went a lot faster with the 89, and it was/is completely legitamite. Yeah, yeah, you have to show work, and half the test you can't use a calculat
  • The voyage 2000 is just a newer ti92+ right? Those have always been the same as the ti89s plus a qwerty layout.

  • What's the point? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jabber01 ( 225154 ) on Thursday January 08, 2004 @10:53AM (#7915097)
    Is there still a niche for calculators? I mean, between engineering computers, calculation programs, and PDAs with scientific calculators in software, dedicated calculators seem to be more and more on the wane.

    Sure, I keep one on my desk, both at work and at home, for incidental calculations, but any "heavy lifting" is done via spreadsheet or a quickie program, or the likes of Mathematica if you're a real freak.

    So, is there still a point to "scientific calculators" which seem to be becoming PDAs with specialized keyboards, less the address book, less the calendar, with the math software in firmware.

    • Re:What's the point? (Score:2, Informative)

      by Colin Walsh ( 1032 )
      Put it this way, I have yet to find a decent enough math package for PalmOS that I feel replaces my trusty TI-85. Basically, I put it down to the fact that data entry on a PDA is far too cumbersome to do calculations fast enough for my liking. As well, a full blown computer may be undesirable in certain situations, or just too expensive to justify, especially for academic use (ie. on tests or assignments). I mean, who wants to boot up their notebook if they're just trying figure out the closest approach of

  • TI-85 (Score:2, Interesting)

    by jargoone ( 166102 ) *
    Ah, that brings back memories. I was 1337 enough to have the 85 instead of the standard issue 81 that everyone else had in high school. I don't remember what the differences were, but everyone was jealous. And it was BLACK. Not as cool as the geeks that turned the TVs on and off with their HPs, but still cool.

    I remember writing programs to save myself 5 minutes a problem on my Econ exams in college. The professor was always puzzled why I would finish so quickly. I told him at the end of the quarter.
    • I never felt the urge to buy a graphing calculator because they were banned from all exams. Maybe the exams need to catch up, or something.

      That said, I always liked Texas calculators from a hardware point of view. They were always more robust and easier to use than their flmsy Casio counterparts that always seemed a few years behind in terms of miniaturisation. I had a TI 30 which had nice clunky buttons that left you in no doubt that you had pressed them, and you could drop it on the floor without bre

  • Cheating (Score:2, Interesting)

    by lxt ( 724570 )
    Surely calculators like this offer more chances for cheating on your exams (SAT, AP etc) - the programming features on these calculators can instead be used to store plain text, enabling you to write down formulae, notes etc.

    I've used a graphing calculator for SATs, and was never asked to erase the memory. With USB, you could simply type up your notes on a PC, transfer them, and use them...
    • ...we weren't allowed to use calculators. I still managed to cough up a 750 on the math part. I guess I would have gotten that 800 had I been allowed that calculator...*cough*
      • When I took it 7-8 years ago we could use calculators just not graphing calculators.
        • Hmm...I may be heading towards the off-topic zone here, but my curiousity is killing me.

          Do you feel you could have taken the SAT and done well without the calculators?

          What I would be interested in looking at is a copy of the exam I took when I took it (late 80s) and compare it to the tests they give out now, or say 7 years ago. Especially when I keep hearing the SAT has been "dumbed down" (maybe it's just the English section? Remember the "regatta" debate, you old folks here? :)

  • Personally, the 86 was my favorite of the bunch. Most powerful and straightforward of the calculators, but not crossing the line of being more like a computer. But instead of upgrading the 86, they're making programs that provide some of it's unique functions to the other calculators:

    A suite of TI-86 features is being created for the TI-83 Plus and TI-89 in the form of free APPS, including:

    * Polynomial Root Finder
    * Simultaneous Equations Solver
    * Differential Equation Graphing (built into

  • Summary of competition (HP calculators) (Score:5, Informative)

    by Ophidian P. Jones ( 466787 ) on Thursday January 08, 2004 @10:56AM (#7915132)
    The RPNs worth buying are:

    16C - awesome calculator for programmers, especially embedded work. There is no better number system converter available at any price. No I can't do bin/dec/hex in my head faster than the 16C and neither can you. Expensive due to relatively low numbers produced.

    42S - pricey, even used, but excellent. Two line display, a replacement for the 15C.

    32SII - somewhat like a 42S but with single line display, not so nice to use.

    15C - same form factor as 16C. At the time HP's top scientific.

    11C - a simpler 15C

    10C - a simpler 11C

    All the above have solid old-HP build quality, excellent key feel and outstanding battery life.

    Older HPs are also usable (and may be preferred) - but they have even greater collector status and sometimes fetch higher prices. They will go through batteries faster and the red LEDs can be harder to see.

    Forget the 48 models, the 49 and all the new stuff. The 48GX is OK if you have to have graphing but the single and dual-line models have better UI for daily use. The 49? HP died when Carly took over. Now they make pretty colored plastic boxes that only work with windows and they have forgotten how to spell "engineering". In fact they fired all the engineers and HP is now run by MBAs in shiny suits.

    (I own 16C, 42s, 15C and 11C models.)
    • The RPNs worth buying are:

      16C - awesome calculator for programmers, especially embedded work. There is no better number system converter available at any price. No I can't do bin/dec/hex in my head faster than the 16C and neither can you. Expensive due to relatively low numbers produced.

      Umm, the best calculator for programmers is... the computer. Last I checked, any reasonable language lets you enter numbers in any base and does the conversions for you. My PC's a ton faster than your 16C, and whenever

    • Well, I love my 48GX. And my brother just upgraded from a 48G to a 49G+ (or whatever their top of the line is now).

      It's a bit frutier looking, bigger (and lighter, which doesn't seem right...) The buttons aren't quite like the olden days but *much* better than the rubber incident with the original 49.

      And it's basically like a 48G on crack with metakern built in and better symbolic manipulation. Not a bad calculator.

      And of course, if it's not RPN it's not a calculator. Every time I try to do even a si
    • Forget the 48 models, the 49 and all the new stuff. The 48GX is OK if you have to have graphing but the single and dual-line models have better UI for daily use.

      You obviously never bothered to read the section on "user defined keyboards", where you can map any command(and even a custom program) to any key. You can set up the "UI" any way you want; I assume you mean keys, because the very same commands do the very same things across all the RPN calculators. Swap, rotate, drop etc are all the same. Since

    • Base conversion. (Score:3, Interesting)

      by zCyl ( 14362 )
      16C - awesome calculator for programmers, especially embedded work. There is no better number system converter available at any price. No I can't do bin/dec/hex in my head faster than the 16C and neither can you. Expensive due to relatively low numbers produced.

      Try the trivial (and free) script at the end of this post, run as:

      base 0xF43B
      base 0b0010101
      base 0755
      base 521

      Output:
      Dec Hex Oct Bin
      493 1ed 755 111101101

      Whenever you're programming, a command line is closer than a calculato

  • Bordering on off-topic, but... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Fortunato_NC ( 736786 ) <verlinh75 AT msn DOT com> on Thursday January 08, 2004 @10:57AM (#7915141) Homepage Journal
    My little bother did a steady business in TI-8x calculators during high school. Our high school required "accelerated" math students to purchase a TI-81 (or 83 or 85, whatever the "state of the art" was at the time) to use in class and on homework.

    My brother would buy calculators cheap from kids at the end of school in June and sell them to the next year's students the next year for about $10 less than the school asked for the new ones. He probably made $250-$500 a year off those calculators. Not exactly chump change to a 15 year old.

  • Nothing beat the old TI-85 (Score:3, Funny)

    by Schezar ( 249629 ) on Thursday January 08, 2004 @11:01AM (#7915192) Homepage Journal
    Ahh, the good old days...

    Back in High School, the teachers didn't necessarily understand the technology. Some profs would ban them altogether to prevent cheating. Others had no idea things like, say, ANSWERS and FORMULAE could be stored in them.

    I remember writing little programs that played cute little games. (And happened to have useful test information in the comments of the code.) I remember playing pong over that crappy link cable in the back of Calculus class.

    Best of all, I remember when the TI-86 came out. Sure it had more memory, but my parents just didn't understand a geek's needs. ("You already HAVE a calculator.")

    Of course, geekery knows no bounds. Scant weeks later I'd overclocked [williams-net.org] my 85. Sure, it went through a whole set of batteries a week, and the games wouldn't work anymore, but it was FAST! (Faster than everyone else's 86 at least ^_~)
  • I'll just pay for someone to titanium plate my sliderule, damnit! :-P

  • great (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Nrlll9 ( 677130 )
    the currrent state of calculator technology is sad. they got so long to improve and they still have shitty UI and small memory. someone like apple ought to get into the market.
    • Now that's an idea... great one for the students, beyond frightening for the teachers, and we'd probably get FireWire calculators on top of it.

      What bothers me is the price gouging, even at Staples... you're going to tell me a vanilla 83+ should cost as much as a Palm Zire21? Hell, an old-school DragonBall Palm is slightly more powerful than an 89/92/V200, runs rings around an 83/84, and you can get either an original Zire or a reconditioned m500 for about $80. If someone put a symbolics math package on a p

  • My favorite calculator (Score:3, Interesting)

    by pcraven ( 191172 ) <paul&cravenfamily,com> on Thursday January 08, 2004 @11:03AM (#7915215) Homepage
    My favorite calculator was one I picked up in the late 80's. It had 128 built in formulas and was from Radio Shack. You could program several other fomulas as well.

    What I haven't seen other calculators do well, is that this had excellent support for greek and other odd math characters. And the calculator was very small. I didn't usually like hauling around the TI's.

    The build in formulas are nice when you can't remember some formula you really needed. Very handy.

    The calculator is similar to some of Casio's calculators today, but I don't see them with good support for math symbols. I'd still use it today, except that it fell apart. You have to squeeze it together just right and hold it that way for it to work correctly.
    • I suspect that the calculator you are talking about is the Radio Shack EC-4023. I have forgotten how to program it, and for that matter how to use some of the more advanced functions, however I keep one at my desk. (I also have a couple of HP calculators, 11C, and 15B that I generally keep at home.)

      I don't know if the EC-4023 ever shows up on ebay, but if the labeling had all worn off, you have that info to work from...

  • It reminds me... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Pollux ( 102520 ) <speter@@@tedata...net...eg> on Thursday January 08, 2004 @11:04AM (#7915230) Journal
    Back eight years ago when I was starting my Algebra II class in high school, I went shopping with my parents to get what "I needed" to get...a TI-82. Mom looked at the calculator, looked at the price ($78 at the time) and said, "Pff...these things will probably be worth $20 in five years."

    Course, the TI-83 (same one that they sold back when I was in high school, just a slight change in design) is priced now for $89, the same as it was back eight years ago. Or I could get the TI-83 SILVER (which is what the TI sales reps are REALLY trying to push on schools now...I know because I'm a math teacher now), which retails for $114 (just because it has 128k ROM and a bunch of crappy "ecucational" software...though anyone who knows anything about basic programming can muster up the same thing with TI's programming interface).

    The point is, you're still getting pretty much the same calculator with almost all of the same abilities. Sure, you can crunch recursive functions, large matricies, and integrals faster, (plus you get more software, which is really not necessary for 95% of customers), but there's really little to justify the need for a SILVER edition when 1) you pay $25 more for 128K ROM and software, and 2) electronic components have gotten a lot cheaper over the last eight years but the prices of TI calculators have not ever gone down.

    Reminded me of a NCTM conference I went to last year...there was a calculator dealer trying to sell some old calculators. There was a TI-92 there, brand-spanking new, for $60. Asked them why it was so darned cheap, and the saleswoman said that "TI now has the TI-92 plusses and discontinued the 92s, so there's no support from TI, just a 30-day warranty from us." Difference between the 92 and the 92-PLUS: 128K of ROM for additional software. Well, the 92-PLUSs retail for $189, but I really got almost all the functionality of a $189 calculator for $60!

    Anyways, all these "new" calculators that TI puts out, I really just wave my hand at them and say, "Baa." I already have one, and there's absolutely no need to "upgrade"!
    • The Silver Edition exists, IMHO, primarily so TI can stop being forced to support the 85/86 platform. It's more or less compatible with the 83+, more powerful than the 86, and looks cooler (yeah! yeah!). You'll notice the USB link cable only supports the 86 on the Mac platform, not on Windows...

  • there are no more workhorse calculators (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Hollins ( 83264 ) on Thursday January 08, 2004 @11:04AM (#7915231) Homepage
    No one make a decent calculator anymore. People are hoarding 10 year old HPs off eBay. I'm using the 48SX I've had since 1990. My requirements aren't too severe:
    • a large set of functions available through a configurable interface
    • RPN
    • a flexible programming language
    • a decent-sized graphical display, but it doesn't need to be so large to make the calculator a mini-laptop. I need to use it in the field
    • tactile buttons that always register and are sufficiently durable to last a couple decades
    • a large 'enter' key prominently placed near the center of the keypad
    • a tough case made of thick plastic that doesn't creak when squeezed, can be dropped a few times without damage and isn't painted with some shiny paint that flakes off. Actually, which isn't painted at all except for the silk-screened indicators over the buttons

    HP stopped making an attempt at the last three some time ago. If I have to put up with a cruddy interface, eventually I'll take the speed hit and use a PDA with stylus. Until then, I'm hoarding old calculators off eBay. The 38SII, while not graphical, is probably the best professional scientific calculator for everyday use, but even they're getting expensive. I'd stick to old 48s/g for graphing.

  • 68010@10MHz, OC'd.

    banging out 16-bit motorola assembly, no MMU.
    ROM with built-in CAS.

    Hardcore.

  • Also includes... (Score:3, Funny)

    by k3vmo ( 620362 ) on Thursday January 08, 2004 @11:15AM (#7915336)
    Also includes new feature to calculate the number of years it'll take me to afford the 40gb iPod...
  • What is this, some kind of geek Web site?
  • ...what's up with the still low resolution? That's about the only really important thing I have been hoping for the last 8 years to be improved, in graphing calculators. I looked at these new TIs, and the graphs still look krix-krax. No thanks. If that 15 MHz CPU doesn't get a decent screen resolution to go with it. it's no great improvement. Most mobile phones nowadays have better graphics.
    As it is, I don't see any reason to replace my trusty old Casio fx8000.

  • I checked out prices at froogle [google.com]:

    Texas Instuments Voyage 200 costs [google.com] about 200 USD
    TI-83 Plus costs [wileycanada.com] 17 USD (!!)
    TI-84 Plus Silver Edition is not found [google.com]

    200 USD vs. 17 USD?! what's going on here?

  • Diminishing returns (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Unknown Kadath ( 685094 ) on Thursday January 08, 2004 @11:22AM (#7915403)
    I don't think I'll be upgrading from my trusty TI-85. It has been dropped, kicked, and occasionally drop-kicked regularly for the past 10 years and still works perfectly. (I guess this is a plug for the 85...do they even still make it?) I have a 93 which mostly sits in a drawer. Whenever I've considered using it, I've realized that I'd be better served by a computer with a math package--bigger display, easier input, more flexible software, faster processing. So, what is the point of a 15 mHz calculator, or a USB-capable one? You don't need something like that in high school (would a student even be allowed to use one?), and you have better resources in college and in the working world.

    Bet you could write some great games for these uber-calculators, though (there were already good games available for the 83/85/86/89 when I was in high school.) Which would have been all the reason I would have needed to get one, had they existed back when I needed something to keep me awake through AP Calc.

    -Carolyn
    • So, what is the point of a 15 mHz calculator, or a USB-capable one? You don't need something like that in high school (would a student even be allowed to use one?), and you have better resources in college and in the working world.

      TI likes to sell its calculators as (among other things) data collectors. The USB interface would presumably be used as an easier way to upload to the computer. Think high school physics classes.

      Oh, and yeah, a high school student would be allowed to use one. I was still in hi

  • ROM != RAM (Score:5, Insightful)

    by corsec67 ( 627446 ) on Thursday January 08, 2004 @11:25AM (#7915429) Homepage Journal
    I HATE this: they say 5x more RAM, but actually, it has the SAME amount of ram. It has more Flash ROM, but that is not nearly as usefull as pure ram.

    Like on the 83+ compared to the 83, the 83+ actually has LESS memory than the 83, not more.

    Sheesh.
  • I've repaced my TI-83+ with a Dell Inspiron and I'm not going back. Even if I admit that the Dell is a little bulkier, its so much more powerful. It can do symbolic solving of complex integrals, etc. I dont see why people are buying those programmable calculators. Especially considering that I have to use a non-programmable one in exams at school anyways.

  • The old Back in my day... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Remlik ( 654872 ) on Thursday January 08, 2004 @11:46AM (#7915659) Homepage
    There are a ton of comments here that start with "Back in my day we didn't have (insert thing here) and we did GREAT!"

    Here's the reality people, most course curriculim has changed since the introduction of the graphing calculators. I took the advanced Calc courses at the UofMN and it was REQUIRED that you owned one to enroll for the class...why? Because the professors had designed the course to use the calculators to teach the students things that were nearly impossible to teach without the visualization via graphing calcs. Sure they could get a comp and a projector and throw up a pick on a screen but they wanted more, they wanted you to change the values of the functions, understand how different terms affected the outcome.

    Calc would have been insanly boring, if all we did was take intergrals, derivs, and solve diffi-Qs. I'm glad I invested in a TI-92 before my freshman year, its versatility beat the crap out of every other TI on the market.

    I should also preface this post with how my class was graded...getting the "answer" was considered 25% of the worth of the question, what they wanted and taught was the process of deriving the answer, so having a calc that could do integrals was rather useless, you still had to show your work, especially on tests..it was nice for checking to make sure you added 2+2 right.
    • Calc would have been insanly boring, if all we did was take intergrals, derivs, and solve diffi-Qs.

      You just summed up the first 3 years of college for me.
  • I stole from my high school a TI-83, TI-85, TI-86, TI-89, and TI-92. My favorite is still the 92, which I kept all my notes for all my classes on - more portable than a laptop, and besides, everyone thinks you're the ubernerd if you're pushing buttons on a calculator in comparative lit.
  • I remember my old TI-85. That thing was awesome in college.

    Weird they made one almost 10 yrs later called a TI-84...heh.

  • Good ole HP 48G (Score:3, Interesting)

    by ducomputergeek ( 595742 ) on Thursday January 08, 2004 @03:46PM (#7919923)
    My HP 48G is almost 10 years old. It still does more than I need it too and it only has 32k of ram. Hell it was good enough to send us to the moon, it's good enough to add, subtract, multiply, and solve stress equations on the fly...

Slashdot Top Deals

Beware the new TTY code!

Close