| Author | Comment |
JcCorp
Probe
Posted: 7 Nov 2005
14:30 GMT
Total Posts:
Edit | Look at this.
And then this.Don't 68k basic programs work on all 68k calcs? If so, why are these BOTH in the archives? On an interesting note, the 2nd one is file ID 1000. Yay! |
Xero Xcape
Marine
Posted: 7 Nov 2005
14:52 GMT
Total Posts: 29 | nooooooooooo!!!!!!!!! I wanted that :P I even have a program that could take it's spot... :D
---
BASIC flames are for n00bs, you don't want to be a n00b do you? | My other calc is a Porsche. |
zkostik
Carrier
Posted: 7 Nov 2005
17:12 GMT
Total Posts: 2486 | Well, this isn't such a big deal. I suppose author could have used 68k at proggy type and only submit one file but maybe he did it so that he can track which calc version would get more attention and thus focus more work on that. Though, there aren't any radically ned basic feats in 89t... Oh well. Btw, are the wto files exactly the same? If so, I suppose they can be merged into one file...
---
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 |
TI Freak
Probe
Posted: 7 Nov 2005
17:18 GMT
Total Posts:
Edit | I was going to say something, but I didn't... |
jessef
Goliath
Posted: 7 Nov 2005
18:09 GMT
Total Posts: 192 | >Don't 68k basic programs work on all 68k calcs?
for the 89 vs 89ti yes but the 92+/v200 have a bigger screen. and the 92 has a diffrent OS. so a 68k basic program that dosn't care about screen size should work on the 89/89ti/92+/V200. |
Andy
Administrator
Posted: 7 Nov 2005
18:36 GMT
Total Posts: 939 | Technically the 92 isn't a 68k calculator, it uses some other processor if I'm not mistaken. |
Lunchbox
Carrier
Posted: 7 Nov 2005
22:06 GMT
Total Posts: 2007 | yeah, but not the 92+ or the v200, i don't think. |
JcCorp
Probe
Posted: 8 Nov 2005
06:07 GMT
Total Posts:
Edit | >>>maybe he did it so that he can track which calc version would get more attention and thus focus more work on that.<<<
I doubt that, considering it is in BASIC. I'll run the files when I get home and see if they are the same.
And I'm just happy that I have 500. :D |
jessef
Goliath
Posted: 8 Nov 2005
10:09 GMT
Total Posts: 192 | I think that the 92 has an 68k processor cause TIGCC can compile for it (if you add some stuff). I think that it has a diffrent OS. |
Xero Xcape
Marine
Posted: 8 Nov 2005
14:27 GMT
Total Posts: 29 | err, well maybe he used the gettime( (the 89TE equivilant of it) in the 89TE version? :P
---
BASIC flames are for n00bs, you don't want to be a n00b do you? | My other calc is a Porsche. |
zkostik
Carrier
Posted: 8 Nov 2005
20:58 GMT
Total Posts: 2486 | 92 is a 68k calc. It's basically like a HW1 89, had a similar OS 1.xx to that of 89. I never had a 92 calc but if I'm not mistaken it had a removable cartridge thingy for its memory, I think it was ether for pgrade purposes or for extra features since it was geared for engineering people...
---
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 |
jessef
Goliath
Posted: 9 Nov 2005
22:21 GMT
Total Posts: 192 | the clock functions are for AMS 2.08(maybe earlier?) and the clock dosn't work on HW1. Maybe the autor wanted the file to apear in both sections. That's interesting about the 92 I didn't really know that it had cartriges. but read somewhere that a 92 + plus pack = HW1 92+ |
BullFrog
Wraith
Posted: 10 Nov 2005
07:01 GMT
Total Posts: 623 | Indeed. TI made flash cartriges, as it were, for 92 owners to install and basically have a 92+. It's really cool, in my opinion. I just wish I had been able to find one when I had a 92...
---
"Men are not prisoners of fate, but only prisoners of their own minds." -Franklin D. Roosevelt |
