The calculator I used most was the TI-85.
On the TI-85 programming BASIC was very easy to remember since using the function key menus and the 2nd menus dedicated to each programming concept (String, Test, Math, etc.) Need to do something with number based? Use the 2nd Base menu.

But on the T-83/84 etc, there are no nice 2nd category menus. The only thing available is the Catalog menu. At least someone can type a letter and jump alphabetically.

I know this complaint is 18 years too late, but I'm surprised at the big loss of functionality when the TI-86 was discontinued. I'm surprised TI didn't extend that with flash ram and carry it further. Instead according to the Wikipedia article, the TI-82 was designed to be more user friendly??

"The TI-82 was designed in 1993 as a stripped down, more user friendly version of the TI-85"

By making writing TI-Basic harder?? It isn't just programming that is harder, when using the TI-85/86 in REPL (direct) mode, finding the function you need by category is intuitive. Need to do something matrix related? Go to the Matrix menu. Seeing the whole list of functions related to matrix math helps to jog memory.

I know with Windows 11, Microsoft deleted a lot of Windows 10 functionality. Take Outlook for example, the Windows 11 version was simply created by using the delete key. The Windows 11 Start menu is basically a revert to a pre Win10 state. But I suspect the real reason wasn't to improve the user experience (UX) but simply to cut down on software maintenance. Less code is cheaper to maintain.

So perhaps I answered my own question.

It is abundantly clear that the TI-82 is an upgrade over the TI-81, rather than a "stripped down TI-85". Presumably, whoever wrote that Wikipedia page just looked at the release dates and came to that conclusion without actually knowing much about either model.
I'm not sure what you mean when you say that the TI-82 doesn't have 2nd menus... It does. They are not the same as the TI-85's, but almost all tokens can be accessed without the catalog menu.

Specifically:

• Examining the respective PCBs of the TI-81 and the TI-82 shows strong similarities. In fact, the last TI-81s were exactly the same PCB as the TI-82, with the link port not populated.
  
• Superficially, the operating systems between the TI-81 and TI-82 are obviously similar, including how menus work, while the TI-85 interface is substantially different.
  
• Assembly-fluent folks who have examined the operating system have confirmed that the similarities are more than skin-deep: you can find vast similarities between the code for the TI-81 and TI-82 operating systems, plus of course additions that make the TI-82 an upgrade from the TI-81.
  
• Even the Smithsonian Museum asserts that the TI-82 is an upgrade of the TI-81

Thank you so much, that chart helps a lot. So the TI-82 descended line isn't as bad as I thought.

Is there a way to cut and paste lines? On the Ti-85/86, it is DELc and UNDEL which while primitive are very useful when editing BASIC.

Another question, while navigating the TI-8[234] calculators, I need some form of escape key but all I can find is QUIT. But Quit is more like a strong escape. On the TI-85, the escape key is EXIT, with a stronger QUIT as an option.

Any suggestions?

CLEAR often serves this purpose.



This functionality exists on later versions of the TI-84+CE but on the 82 your best option is probably to put the line in a new program and Rcl that program.

I am playing around with my TI-84 Plus silver edition and I am trying to set a variable lower case x:

1➡️x

But it won't let me. To my horror, it seems that only single capital letters can be a variable?? So I'm limited to only 26 or so??

There's also theta. If you want to store larger amounts of information, you can use lists L1 through L6 or named lists, which can store 999 elements each.

TI had such a fabulous basic with the TI-85/86. As many variables with as many names and types as you could imagine. Really full featured. And they ditched it for something so clunky?!?

I am astonished and flabbergasted. I was curious what the calculator line evolved into after the TI-85, I could not imagine such a loss.

What drove this marketing decision?

This is not a marketing decision, nor is it as outrageous as you seem to think it is. I suggest considering why TI would put a scripting language on a calculator in the first place.

TI did not set out to make an amazing scripting language; they set out to make one which was fit-for purpose. They prioritized making something that can be taught incrementally in a classroom without taking huge amounts of time away from other content. The additional complexity of the 85-series BASIC, while perhaps more natural for you given your background with these calculators, is less desirable for this purpose.

Using your example, forcing variables to indicate their type like what 82-BASIC does is a reasonable way to hide the complexity of having a type system from the user, and mirrors what many parts of physics an mathematics do.

It's worth noting that you have not even experienced the genuinely terrible parts of TI-BASIC yet. There are parts of this language which are actually half-baked or "clunky". But this is a language designed to provide a simplified model of programming to a student who may not otherwise be interested in the subject; in this way the 82-BASIC has proven itself to be a very usable tool.

Thank you @iPhoenix that perspective helps to see the reasons.
So the 82-Basic is more "paint by numbers". I now remember the limitations from when I had a TI-81 and remember my delight when I first got my TI-85. A long time ago for these memories to resurface.

Checking the TI line up, I think people who wanted a fuller language was supposed to go to the TI-92 and upwards and use Lua.