TI vs. Calculator Hackers 463
Nyall writes "So a bunch of TI calculator programming enthusiasts got together to factor the keys Texas Instruments uses to sign the operating system binaries for the ti83+ (a z80 architecture) and the ti89/v200 (a 68k architecture) series of calculators. Now Texas Instruments is sending out DMCA notices to take them down."
first post (Score:5, Funny)
Math (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Math (Score:5, Funny)
TI has a new calculator based on the original Pentium?
Re: (Score:2)
Calm down, joaommp...
Re:Math (Score:5, Funny)
every time anyone has said "woosh" it's been non-funny and every other time it was just as deserving of its own "woosh"
whoosh
Re:Math (Score:4, Funny)
Z80 is pre-x86 architecture, i.e. pre-pre-Pentium, and 68k is pre-Power PC architecture.
So technically, this should have sarcasmed with "oshwho".
Re:Math (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah. I don't think TI factored this development into consideration when it released this product.
Re:Math (Score:5, Informative)
Wikileaks link (Score:5, Informative)
I'm a lurker in that community and I have to say I'm extremely disappointed with TI. The community has had to reverse engineer every component of the hardware with no help from TI, and has done an amazing job writing development tools and mapping out which memory addresses do what.
Here's the wikileaks link [wikileaks.org] to the keys.
Re:Wikileaks link (Score:5, Insightful)
And thousands of people will mirror it....
What will they do with people outside the US where the DMCA does not apply?
The ease of which students can make their own programs is one of the reasons my college asked us to buy TI-brand calculators and not Casio (which is the other choice they give.. hp is not supported at all :-p)
Meh...
Re:Wikileaks link (Score:5, Funny)
What will they do with people outside the US where the DMCA does not apply?
Get the US government to invade them?
Re:Wikileaks link (Score:5, Informative)
And here's the Freenet [freenetproject.org] key for the zip file: freenet:CHK@cua6vt6OGoe8dBOY2D4PR13jt~FvyvmHlMJKXPcXUgs,gFqVGC6lWjlSdE0cizGzWcyE5Y9f5J0QyWo-GNmLluY,AAIC--8/keys.zip
Re:Wikileaks link (Score:4, Funny)
I'm kind of kidding, but posting of freenet links on slashdot ought to be standard procedure whenever something is DMCA'd.
Re:Wikileaks link (Score:5, Funny)
I wonder if it's mirrored here: http://crystalwind.com/index.html [crystalwind.com]
No HP??? (Score:5, Funny)
I that they so shortsighted would be can't believe!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:No HP??? (Score:5, Informative)
Oh well, I figured everyone would get it. HP Calculators use "Reverse Polish Notation" (RPN), also known as "postfix notation". Unlike ordinary "infix notation" calculators, in which you put the operator between the two operands, HP calculators take both operands followed by the operator, thereby eliminating the need for parenthesizing an expression. So, where you might enter "5 * ( 3 + 4 ) =" on an infix calculator, you'd enter "5 [enter] 3 [enter] 4 [enter] + * " on an HP calculator. Every time you enter a number, it gets pushed on the stack. Every operator pops the top two items off the stack, performs the operation, and pushes the result on the stack.
One can write English sentences the same way if one considers the verb to be the operator, while the subject and direct object are the two operands. Thus, what I wrote was the RPN equivalent of "I can't believe that they would be so shortsighted!".
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm going to try to check your work.
We can construct a parse tree for a sentence by recursively grouping two groups into a single group. I believe the following is the correct parse tree for your original sentence.
{I {(can't believe) [that [they ((would be) (so shortsighted))]]}}
You want verbs to be the operators. "believe" and "be" are the verbs. "can't" and "would" are auxillery verbs. Those would be unary operators that act on a simple verb. But since a verb is acting as an operator, it is tough to enter
Re:Wikileaks link (Score:5, Interesting)
The DMCA doesn't protect hardware in the U.S., either. Since AFAIK TI doesn't sell copyrighted software that is protected by DRM, this is clearly not a DMCA violation, and unless TI's lawyers haven't read any of the cases that have clarified this beyond a reasonable doubt, it also qualifies TI for perjury charges for deliberately making a false DMCA claim---not that any attorney general will actually have the guts to make an example of them....
IMHO, all these folks need to do is file a proper DMCA counter notice and then go about their business. Of course, IANAL, and they should consider getting advise from one.
Re:Wikileaks link (Score:4, Interesting)
It is not protecting copying of the firmware, it's preventing the running of unsigned firmware. It's probably not preventing the copy of applications either. It's simply preventing "unauthorized" software from running on the hardware. It's a lock, not copy protection. See the garage door opener case for an example where this is not protected under the DMCA.
Re:Wikileaks link (Score:5, Informative)
No, this likely falls completely and totally outside that law. This project is not about brute forcing crypto keys used to prevent decrypting the firmware. AFAIK, the firmware and apps are not encrypted. This project is about brute forcing keys used to SIGN firmware. The only time a signature is covered by the DMCA is if it is used to prevent people from using illegal copies of software that for some technical reason could not be copied with such a signature (e.g. game titles installed on a hard drive). Since no TI-83+ hardware is EVER sold without a copy of their firmware, such an argument is moot. Anyone with access to the hardware also has a legally licensed copy of the firmware. Therefore, the signature does not prevent people from obtaining copies of the firmware illegally in any useful way, and as such, is not a copyright protection mechanism under the DMCA.
In short, unless TI uses DRM software resident in their firmware to protect OTHER titles from copying, this clearly falls WELL outside the realm of the DMCA. Bear in mind that there are legal precedents for what I'm saying here. Similar cases have been tried in the past (e.g. Lexmark). The courts have consistently ruled that such circumstances are not protected. Now if TI has an app store and sells applications that are coded to your particular calculator in some way, they would have a case. Otherwise, using the DMCA in this way goes way beyond silly.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If I were an evil and nasty copyright lawyer, I could find a DMCA 1201 hook to hang this on. Even if I couldn't get DMCA 1201(a), I could go for DMCA 1201(b)
Re:Wikileaks link (Score:5, Funny)
What will they do with people outside the US where the DMCA does not apply?
Put them on a hacker terrorist watch list and disappear them the next time they partake in a terrorist training camp (e.g. a math conference).
Re:Wikileaks link (Score:5, Insightful)
what makes the TI calculators better than, say, Pi Cubed (and a few other apps) for the iPhone?
Primarily the fact that it is a calculator and not a phone. The TI-89 has better numeric capabilities, great graphing ability, and a nice display. It can also run for months on a single pair of AA batteries.
That, and it doesn't cost more than $800 a year to operate.
Is it the interface, dedicated keys? RPN?
Yes, yes, and no [wikipedia.org]. I can't imagine trying to use a tiny little touch screen for any serious calculator use.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The TI-89 has better numeric capabilities, great graphing ability, and a nice display. It can also run for months on a single pair of AA batteries.
Actually, the TI-89 uses four AAA batteries, but the point is made.
Also, many colleges and standardized tests require students to use calculators rather than other devices because they are (at least nominally) limited to calculation. So far, at least, you can't surf Wikipedia for answers on a calculator. The TI-92 calculator is actually forbidden by some tests, despite the fact that it's functionally equivalent to the TI-89, because it has a QWERTY keyboard, which makes it a "computer."
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yeah why would you want to overwrite the OS when you can just write your programs from within Windows?
This opens the door for an open-source TI operating system. TI releases minor OS updates every few years and doesn't add much new functionality. Now we can do whatever we want and have it integrated completely with the home screen.
Its the usual castle gate mentality (Score:5, Insightful)
While the TI engineers would probably be happy to share the info, a bunch of management suits still living in the 1960s want to keep everything secret and in-house because they're sure They Know Best as to what everyone wants. Well we all know where this sort of blinkered thinking leads - users eventually just give you the finger and move elsewhere especially if a large part of your core market is the very type of hacker (in the old sense of the word) that they want to stop.
And who are they kidding anyway , these are just fscking calculators! They can't even argue that installing new stuff on them is going to lose them any income anyway. Its not like the average user upgrades his calculator OS every year!
Re:Its the usual castle gate mentality (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Its the usual castle gate mentality (Score:4, Insightful)
The TI calculator division is all about placating teachers and standardized testing agencies. If it's too easy to install custom software in a relatively undetectable fashion, then the calculators won't be approved for testing and classroom use.
It's not TI that's the control freaks - it's the teachers.
Re:Its the usual castle gate mentality (Score:5, Insightful)
The desire to keep the code secure is in a fact a desire to insure sales. For instance, the TI application for the computer is not free, and, IIRC, not site licensed. If the ROM were available, like it is on most of the HP calculators, then someone could easily develop an OSS application and make drive TI sales away. I know that some applications are available, but they require a calculator to download the ROM, and the solutions are not as elegant as the HP calculator.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
what is the answer?
42.
Re:Its the usual castle gate mentality (Score:4, Insightful)
If the school is concerned with the costs involved, I'm sure they could work a deal with TI to receive the "in-class only" calculators for free or at cost. I mean, if you think about it, free (pirated) copies of Windows is the main reason for the success of the Windows operating system... most likely, having easy access to TI calculators in school would get students comfortable with them, and would likely boost TI's market share... it's a win-win situation, and TI can wholeheartedly support the hack/homebrew crowd at the same time without worrying the teachers.
Re:Its the usual castle gate mentality (Score:5, Insightful)
If it's too easy to install custom software in a relatively undetectable fashion, then the calculators won't be approved for testing and classroom use.
They're already disallowed by many teachers because students learned they can simply type their notes into the calculator. (Who needs to remember equations when the calculator stores them for you?) The TI-89 and TI-92 are not allowed in ACT tests because they're designed to allow note-taking (the 92 more than the 89, but still). (That particular requirement made my parents buy a new TI-83+, even though I already had a TI-89.)
Honestly I've always disagreed with resistance to calculator use. Why can't I use a calculator to do calculus, or physics? The hard part isn't remembering the equations, anyway; the hard part is remembering which equation to use. Storing the list of equations in the calculator doesn't magically make you know which equation to use, it just helps you remember what the equations are in the first place. Sure, you could probably type notes into the calculator telling you which to use when, but all that effort is going to make you learn it anyway, so it most likely wouldn't make a difference.
I always hated losing points because I transposed two numbers or something somewhere in the calculation (which would not have happened had I been using a calculator), or because I'm simply terrible at doing math by hand. I honestly have no idea how I got a 4 on that AP Calculus test.
If I were hiring someone for a position that required a lot of math, and he proudly declared that he never uses a calculator, I don't think I would hire him. I would want my employees to use calculators - even if only to check their work.
Um... end rant.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I didn't use pre-made programs during my tests, I did make programs during the tests to do repeat processes. But I got to keep my Drug Wars and Indycar racer games, along with all my other math programs after the test.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Its the usual castle gate mentality (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I've found that "completely open-book" is common in statistics courses. I don't think that is the case for other kinds of maths or science courses.
Re:Wikileaks link (Score:4, Insightful)
A. Fair Use to publish two numbers!
B. Not Applicable if the numbers were never in the calculator code!
Re: (Score:2)
Worst move ever, (Score:2, Insightful)
Instead they stifle the enthusiast groups, but whatever I never really got into TI programming and hacking anyways.
Exactly. (Score:4, Insightful)
If they want to be as successful as HP calculators, they need to do more to encourage more enthusiasts...
Re:Exactly. (Score:4, Informative)
Woosh (Score:2)
Perhaps you didn't see the "ellipsis of sarcasm" at the end of the sentence.
That's because HP calculators are too powerful. (Score:4, Interesting)
I've been using HP scientific calculators since the 32S (the one that opened up like a book). At the time, in 1989, they were state-of-the-art, and math teachers had no idea that they could do definite and indefinite integration and differentiation.
Now, of course, math teachers have figured out that modern calculators are essentially full-blown computers. The last calculus course I took a year ago did not allow any calculators, but the last time I was in a math class that allowed them only TI calculators were allowed. I could not use my HP50G as it was too powerful and would enable me to cheat.
I think we've seen the end of high-end calculator development because the main market of those devices - college students - can't use them anymore in their classes.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
While math classes like calculus and ODEs typically ban calculators from tests, there are still all kinds of chemistry, physics, and engineering classes where a 50g is both allowed and incredibly useful for homework and tests. More than any other feature, the efficient units system in the 50g really helped me in physics and was a great check that my calculations were correct.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
In my 4 years of undergrad and beyond (started as a EE major and switched to chemistry), I never saw a HP calc.
Re: (Score:2)
I once saw an HP calc in the discount bin at office depot. Buried deep, under a pile of rubbish, scrawled on the back in angry sharpie it read:
Not a TI-83!
I left it there and went to find a TI calc
Re: (Score:2)
Hang on - it's 2009 and we're still arguing about calculators? Has this been going on since before the Amiga / Atari stuff?
(Comptometer ftw!)
Re:Exactly. (Score:5, Funny)
Hang on - it's 2009 and we're still arguing about calculators?
Vi sucks.
Re:Exactly. (Score:4, Insightful)
If I were to teach a math class at any level, there would be no calculators of any sort needed.
That's how the good ones teach, anyway. A calculator would have been of very little help in most of the no-calculator exams I took. It was more useful on the homework, but you still had to show your work.
Re: (Score:2)
In my 4 years of undergrad and beyond (started as a EE major and switched to chemistry), I never saw a HP calc.
That's really sad. But from the looks of those on the HP website, I can see why. Some don't even have an Enter key. Most look like they're something else that's been re-badged "HP", except for the 35s which seems to have gone the new Mustang/Challenger/Camero/Mini Cooper route. The rest look as toy-like as the TIs.
Re:Worst move ever, (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Worst move ever, (Score:5, Insightful)
Those few calculator hackers (there are a lot more than 100 of them; they're a minority, but not that small a one) aren't just a few users. They're busy writing games and other useful programs. Those programs appear on just about every TI calculator out there, and plenty of people who aren't even remotely enthusiasts or geeks are using them. The enthusiasts have a disproportionate influence on how popular the platform is, because they make it more useful for everyone.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Those 100 release things that make the calculator more useful to the millions of others.
TI is in the business of selling calculators, and only makes an OS for it because a calculator this sophisticated without an OS is just a circuit board. If a bunch of hackers wants to make a better OS, it's in TI's best interest to let them.
Re: (Score:2)
Because those '100' other features aren't certified, tested or controlled.
As someone said above, if you let in a ton of extra features, this won't be certified for use on standardized tests. When I took it the TI-89 was allowed on the SAT.
Imagine a hacker putting in 100x extra functions which could do almost anything the CPU could handle, including stuff the original TI-89 couldn't do AND that the SAT board doesn't want it to do. Is it TI's fault? Is the student 'cheating'?
It wouldn't be too hard to create
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Worst move ever, (Score:4, Interesting)
What makes them so smart? Is TI selling more calculators because you can play games on them, or because some kid has to buy one to do his homework? I had a TI-85 in high school and played games all through whatever math class I was in at the time, but I would have had one regardless of whether it did anything other than my homework.
My stance on the subject is that TI would stand to benefit financially to one degree or another from any and all of the following:
This is off the top of my head. As one who participated in the ticalc.org [ticalc.org] modding community when it was all Z-shell and assembly hacks, I can say for sure that I benefited from third-party applications and learned quite a lot by programming low-level software. A lot has changed since then, but I can attest firsthand to the benefits of an open TI calculator.
Really, though, what does TI have to lose? Has the enthusiast community as it stands actually harmed them? If so, I'm not aware of it.
Re:Worst move ever, (Score:4, Informative)
It's ironic that you use Blizzard as your example here, given that their response to bnetd established the precedent of using the DMCA to shut down reverse engineering.
Re: (Score:2)
I have to agree. I never got much into writing my own apps for my calculators (which have been predominantly TI - I started on a TI-83 in high school and moved to a TI-89 in college), but man on man did I download and install a lot of community apps. They really added a lot of usefulness to the machine (particularly the TI-83 whose built in feature set was very lacking compared to the TI-89). If those apps weren't available I likely would have looked for a calculator that did have them.
It's strange too t
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Personally, I'm appalled that kids are still using the TI-83, and it still costs about $100. I used a TI-83 in high school, almost 15 years ago, and it cost $100 back then too. Haven't we had any advances in calculator technology since then?
Someone needs to get the DOJ on these guys for anti-trust violations. This is clear evidence of an abusive monopoly.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This isn't about 3rd party apps. This is about signing for the OS.
TI doesn't care what programs you write, in assembly OR TI-Basic. They do care if you overwrite their OS.
Re:Worst move ever, (Score:5, Insightful)
TI doesn't care what programs you write, in assembly OR TI-Basic. They do care if you overwrite their OS.
Funny, I don't remember agreeing to a EULA when I first opened the box and powered it up. Their right to ANYthing concerning their equipment ended when I bought it.
Screw calculator binaries; how about x64 drivers? (Score:4, Interesting)
Texas Instruments makes damn fine graphing calculators, but would it be so hard to write a damn x64 driver? I can't use the USB interface with either my home PC or my laptop because both are running x64 (7 Pro on the desktop, Vista Home Premium on the laptop). And I'll be damned if I go back to 32 bits just to make the calculator happy.
I did googling and didn't find anything existing; has anyone tackled writing a homebrew x64 USB driver? I think all the information needed is already out there, but I don't have the time/motivation to write the driver myself (especially having never written a driver before).
Re:Screw calculator binaries; how about x64 driver (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Get a USB traffic sniffing application
2. Run the TI driver on a Windows XP VM and record the traffic as you transfer files.
3. Write your own driver with libusb-win32 and pray that it works
4. Become hero to the TI community!!!
Re: (Score:2)
5. Get sued by TI.
6. ???
7. Profit!
Re: (Score:2)
I think #6 in this case is 'counter-sue'
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Try TiLP 2 [ticalc.org]. Made by said TI-homebrew community.
Re:Screw calculator binaries; how about x64 driver (Score:4, Informative)
Streisand Effect (Score:5, Interesting)
You'd have thought that Texas Instruments would have learned when the Blu-Ray consortium tried to stop the spread of the '09 F9 ...' key.
Re:Streisand Effect (Score:5, Informative)
And just in case you forget how badly that went down, here's a reminder...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSQIoXf294E [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
DMCA Misrepresentation claim viable (Score:5, Informative)
It's highly unlikely that the factors of an RSA private key are subject to copyright protection. Therefore the groups may have a viable claim for DMCA misrepresentation under subsection (f):
Texas Instruments may just have Diebolded [eff.org] itself.
Re:DMCA Misrepresentation claim viable (Score:5, Informative)
Copyright?
Wouldn't this be more likely come under the circumvention of cryptographic protection techniques which the DMCA also outlaws?
Re:DMCA Misrepresentation claim viable (Score:5, Informative)
Two sections of Title 17 (Copyrights) are relevant. 17 USC 512 (safe harbor) and 17 USC 1201 (anti-circumvention). The notice [brandonw.net] is styled as one under 17 USC 512:
TI appears to be claiming that the copyright in the TI-83 Plus operating system software is infringing. This therefore appears to be a notice under 512(c)(3). Anti-circumvention is a totally different section of the copyright code, 1201. There is no takedown procedure for access control circumvention materials.
But with regards to anti-circumvention claims: It appears that TI is claiming that the signing keys circumvent a "technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title." This is a term of art.
Are signing keys necessary to gain access to the TI 83 Plus operating system binary? As far as I know, no. My understanding is that they are only used to prepare operating system images for installation onto the calculator.
Re:DMCA Misrepresentation claim viable (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
And just in case, I think someone might have placed the keys, here: http://crystalwind.com/index.html [crystalwind.com]
Two things. . . (Score:2)
This is about calculator keys, right?
That shark jumping thing has just happened. DMCA, please go home now. You're drunk and you're scaring the remaining guest, the family dog and our kids are shuddering in their bedrooms in fear.
Also. . , you want a calculator hack? I'll give you a calculator hack!
Type the following number. . . "07734" on your calculator and then invert the screen for a pleasant surprise!!!!!
(Ooooh, it's so exciting and. . , welcoming!)
-FL
Re: (Score:2)
Hooray for the clash of '70s memes with 2k memes!
Now to figure out a way to mix 710.77345 with Iraq.
subterfuge (Score:5, Funny)
Someone in TI's legal dept. who knows what the Streisand Effect is wants these keys publicized.
Well, we can hope that's the reason.
Re: (Score:2)
DRM in a calculator? (Score:5, Funny)
I'm shocked to hear that TI is even bothering to sign things. What exactly could be in a calculator that you would want to protect from hackers or end users?
"Oh no, a virus has replaced all my Fourier transforms with Laplace transforms!"
Exam answers? (Score:2)
When I was in college, we weren't even allowed to use calculators with memory, and in some exams we had to use slide rules only.
Someone could be sneaking in exam answers in a ROM that didn't show up until you entered 1337 and hit "=" five times to hide it from the proctors...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
One of the reasons that TI signs things is to provide a form of copy protection for the 3rd-party applications which are sold via the online store. The calculator operating system will not run a flash application for which it does not currently have a license. The operating system binary is signed so that you can't tamper with it in order to disable the copy-protection. A modified operating system could potentially run flash applications without a license.
As far as user-created software goes, TI doesn't
This makes me wanna... (Score:2)
...use some of my spare CPU time to help out. Any easy way?
From a community perspective. (Score:3, Insightful)
I've been working with Ti calcs and the Ti community for years, and Frankly, I feel that Ti have been giving us programmers a slap in the face.
First off, they keep resurrecting the Ti-82 series of calcs with endless versions and case updates while killing off more capable OS designs like the 85 series. I have a feeling the 92 series (which inclueds the 89, 89ti, and Voyage 200) is next.
Then, they remove program editing from their windows app as well as letting it stagnate with documented link bugs still included.
Finally, they release the Nspire. The Nspire is such a leap backward from their previous calcs that they actually had to make a version that emulates the 83. (again with the 82 love) It has a neutered programming language. no draw support. no 3d support, removed math functions, no proper input or output channels, ETC. I don't know who this calculator is going to appeal to. K-12 don't want it cause its more expensive than an 83, Higher education doesn't want it cause it's neutered vs other calcs in it's class and programmers don't want to touch it cause it's basically useless with no SDK or useful programming language to speak of.
I could probably talk about the SDK and it's lack of updates and support as well, but I'd rather let the Ti Flash community programmers do the talking here.
I'm not a fan of the key facoring, because it's just going to make Ti clamp down on the community that keeps their calc business (and my hobby) alive, but I don't blame the Ti Community, Not when Ti listenes more to a 9th grade teacher whining about little Johnny playing games on his calc instead of the professor or engineer thats using his calc as a cheap portable way of processing a complex algorythm or data probe accqsition device.
IANAL but TI is screwed now (Score:4, Funny)
Sending out false DMCA notices opens up TI to some very serious penalties. And this point every member of the team can hire and lawyer and get TI to pay for it, plus be charged with some additional fines. The DMCA in this instance is not a gray area at all. There is no copyrighted being circumvented by this perfectly legal reverse engineering, and a kind of reverse engineering expressly allowed by the DMCA itself.
I am guessing TI executives decided they didn't like something, and forced their lawyers to make a very bad legal decision. Using the DMCA to bully people works, but only if you don't trip over the DMCA itself as TI has done.
You'd lose money with me (Score:3, Insightful)
On the other hand, I see that what you sell is basically what I bought 10 years ago, so that tells me a lot about your business sense.
However, stagnated companies usually die, no matter how much they squelch. At least the OMAP is cool.
"High end" calculators? (Score:3, Insightful)
I haven't looked a 'high end' calculators in years, I use computers all the time. I kind of knew they were still around but really, these machines are terrible!
My expectations were, a modern cheap processor ... like the arm, possibly underclocked for power consumption; well looks like the HPs have that. An infinite amount of memory; well probably 64M each of RAM and flash. That's infinite for a calculator. And a small, but usable screen, probably 320x200x16(4) grayscale, (colour's supposed to consume a lot more power). And a pair of USB cables that allow you to connect to a PC or an external flash drive. The PC software would let you copy the entire calculator and run and program it on the PC (emulator) or the actual hardware.
Well, These TI's with a z80 processor, sorry you only use a z80 mask nowadays if you're a complete skinflint, "high end" gear uses processors that are easier to program. The 68k sounds reasonable; but it's probably a powerhog compared to the Arm (most 32bit+ processors are).
Probably the thing I'm most shocked about is the screen, those 132x64x2 displays are at least 15 years old and have never been big enough for a reasonable graph. But here we are stuck in the 90's or even the 80's.
Quite simply these machines should be two chips, a screen, a load of buttons, usb connector and a battery.
They should no longer be expensive; but are being sold for about the same prices as the smaller netbooks. Or this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GP2X_Wiz [wikipedia.org]
They are all so very disappointing.
A long time ago... (Score:3, Funny)
Does anyone know or remember that one?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Probably the factorial function, as that's about the most computationally intensive thing you can do on a non-programmable scientific calculator. Try 69! as that's the biggest you can do assuming that the calculator maxes out at an exponent of 99. Usually takes several seconds to several tens of seconds on slower calculators to run.
Re: (Score:2)
And RPL. Probably the best-engineered calculator run-time ever.
Re: (Score:2)
Shouldn't it be "At least the calculator can work when the lights are on?"
Re: (Score:2)
So?