It might appeal to expert BASIC coders as well if they're the kind of people to like overcoming extreme limitations. The main danger for their group is if it's totally impossible to have acceptable speed for any kind of game and that no ASM lib comes out after they pushed the platform to its limits.
Though I'm personally disappointed by the small amount of RAM and the weak processor of the TI-84+CSE, I'll tolerate 84+CSE programmers.
blue_bear_94 wrote:
Though I'm personally disappointed by the small amount of RAM and the weak processor of the TI-84+CSE, I'll tolerate 84+CSE programmers.
That seems like a pretty provocative thing to say: you'll "tolerate" a group of programmers because they choose to program on a particular device? If there was a such thing as platformism or bigotry related to calculators, that would be about as close as I think you could get. You haven't really said why the unchanged RAM and CPU makes you dislike the programmers rather than the device containing that hardware.
Eh, confusing.
I take it back; I didn't know what I was saying.

Addendum: I meant that I won't hate 84+CSE programmers.
blue_bear_94 wrote:
Eh, confusing.
I take it back; I didn't know what I was saying.

Addendum: I meant that I won't hate 84+CSE programmers.
Indeed, I understood that, and I'm questioning why that would even be an issue. I could understand if you chose to not "hate" the device but only dislike its capabilities, but I wouldn't expect anyone to hate programmers for a device because they liked that device. You might feel they had poor judgment, and explain in clear words what part of their choices you disagreed with, or you might feel that they could try a different approach, but even not hating them sounds like a biased reaction to me.
I'm still confused.
blue_bear_94 wrote:
I'm still confused.
You originally asserted on Omnimaga that the TI-84 Plus C Silver Edition was "over-rated junk", but you never made it clear what made it over-rated: ie, what people thought was good about it that was not in fact good. You offered a comparison to the Casio Prizm, which does indeed have objectively better specifications but a smaller base of users and existing code. I am trying to understand that assertion in the context or whether you're criticizing the calculator itself or the programmers who plan to use it.
I am criticizing the calculator itself.
blue_bear_94 wrote:
I am criticizing the calculator itself.
OK, I get that, and I'm asking you to provide details of what exactly you're criticizing about the calculator. I can't criticize the iPad and then when asked what's wrong with it say "the Nexus 7 is better". That's not a criticism, that's a subjective assertion. What exactly are you criticizing about the TI-84+CSE, and why?
blue_bear_94 wrote:
Addendum: I meant that I won't hate 84+CSE programmers.


I'm giving the TI Color programmers the utmost respect; It's not going to be easy programming a fast color game from the looks of it.
I'm criticizing the calculator because it doesn't have that good of the specs (specifically, the RAM and the processor).
The RAM: only 21KB to the user (as the total amount is 128 KB). That's even less RAM than the 84+SE.
The processor: It's too weak, considering the increased screen size. TI could have used something more powerful without giving up the 84+ feel.
KermMartian wrote:
blue_bear_94 wrote:
I'm still confused.
You originally asserted on Omnimaga that the TI-84 Plus C Silver Edition was "over-rated junk", but you never made it clear what made it over-rated: ie, what people thought was good about it that was not in fact good. You offered a comparison to the Casio Prizm, which does indeed have objectively better specifications but a smaller base of users and existing code. I am trying to understand that assertion in the context or whether you're criticizing the calculator itself or the programmers who plan to use it.


Just for the record, he didn't say that, I did. And I was a little forceful about it there. If you want to see why I criticise the TI-84CSE, take a look at my blog post. Wink
flyingfisch wrote:
KermMartian wrote:
blue_bear_94 wrote:
I'm still confused.
You originally asserted on Omnimaga that the TI-84 Plus C Silver Edition was "over-rated junk", but you never made it clear what made it over-rated: ie, what people thought was good about it that was not in fact good. You offered a comparison to the Casio Prizm, which does indeed have objectively better specifications but a smaller base of users and existing code. I am trying to understand that assertion in the context or whether you're criticizing the calculator itself or the programmers who plan to use it.


Just for the record, he didn't say that, I did. And I was a little forceful about it there. If you want to see why I criticise the TI-84CSE, take a look at my blog post. Wink
My mistake. Here's the response to your blog post that I already posted in this topic:
KermMartian wrote:
*bump* I just want to say that I read over the arguments in the ClrHome (or TakeFlight, I guess?) link in flyingfisch's signature, and I find the arguments to be extremely less convincing than my editorial "Casio Prizm: Why TI Calc Coders Should Abandon the TI-Nspire CX". I'm afraid that rather than attacking the issue from an ideological or pedagogical standpoint (ie, "the TI-84+CSE will shoot curious students exploring programming in the foot") it reads like a promotion for the Prizm ("You should buy a Prizm because it's more powerful"). I will certainly agree that the Prizm is the more powerful, cheaper calculator, and that its more powerful hardware makes it more attractive for casual (C/Lua) programming. However, because the TI-84 Plus C Silver Edition supports TI-BASIC and ASM programming, and TI has made no efforts to lock us out of native programming for the device, I find articles claiming that the TI-84+CSE is bad for general programming to be disingenuous and misleading.
KermMartian wrote:
blue_bear_94 wrote:
Though I'm personally disappointed by the small amount of RAM and the weak processor of the TI-84+CSE, I'll tolerate 84+CSE programmers.
That seems like a pretty provocative thing to say: you'll "tolerate" a group of programmers because they choose to program on a particular device? If there was a such thing as platformism or bigotry related to calculators, that would be about as close as I think you could get. You haven't really said why the unchanged RAM and CPU makes you dislike the programmers rather than the device containing that hardware.
Also I think his review is misleading because it states that it lacks a string command. Granted, there isn't really a String() command literally but it has string support, with various commands such as Sub() and equ>str or the opposite. In fact it has been there since the TI-83 days.

As for bigotry at least it's not as bad as banning forum members who talk about buying a certain calc model in particular (which he did before). Razz But yeah it's not really appropriate, plus he's most likely gonna be surrounded by hordes of TI-84+CSE users next school year, especially if there's very little price difference with the TI-84+SE.
KermMartian wrote:
*bump* I just want to say that I read over the arguments in the ClrHome (or TakeFlight, I guess?) link in flyingfisch's signature, and I find the arguments to be extremely less convincing than my editorial "Casio Prizm: Why TI Calc Coders Should Abandon the TI-Nspire CX". I'm afraid that rather than attacking the issue from an ideological or pedagogical standpoint (ie, "the TI-84+CSE will shoot curious students exploring programming in the foot") it reads like a promotion for the Prizm ("You should buy a Prizm because it's more powerful").

I suppose there is a difference in philosophy here. Personally, if I can get a vastly more powerful calculator, for much less money, I'm going to buy it. I really don't care whether it uses my favorite input method, BASIC derivative, or processor.

Quote:
I will certainly agree that the Prizm is the more powerful, cheaper calculator, and that its more powerful hardware makes it more attractive for casual (C/Lua) programming. However, because the TI-84 Plus C Silver Edition supports TI-BASIC and ASM programming, and TI has made no efforts to lock us out of native programming for the device, I find articles claiming that the TI-84+CSE is bad for general programming to be disingenuous and misleading.


OK... I am not sure how fast BASIC is, but if PCSEBall did not have a pause between each frame purposely programmed into it, I don't have very high hopes for ASM program speed.
flyingfisch wrote:

OK... I am not sure how fast BASIC is, but if PCSEBall did not have a pause between each frame purposely programmed into it, I don't have very high hopes for ASM program speed.


I hope you realize that animated gif is completely unrepresentative of actual speed.
calc84maniac wrote:
flyingfisch wrote:

OK... I am not sure how fast BASIC is, but if PCSEBall did not have a pause between each frame purposely programmed into it, I don't have very high hopes for ASM program speed.


I hope you realize that animated gif is completely unrepresentative of actual speed.


Oh, I'm sorry, I actually didn't know that. :-\
PCSEball runs at 120 frames per second, or 1208 16x16 sprites per second (at 15MHz).

Quote:
I suppose there is a difference in philosophy here. Personally, if I can get a vastly more powerful calculator, for much less money, I'm going to buy it. I really don't care whether it uses my favorite input method, BASIC derivative, or processor.
Saying "Calculator x sucks because calculator y has these features" is not a philosophy, it's a comparative claim. I maintain that it's disingenuous to decry the features of the TI-84 Plus C Silver Edition in a simple numbers-to-numbers comparison with the Prizm. I could say that the Prizm is a horrible calculator because my computer has a much bigger screen, but that doesn't tell the whole story either.
alright then I'll change my view from "the TI-84CSE is horrible", to "why the TI-84CSE isn't worth the money".
KermMartian wrote:
PCSEball runs at 120 frames per second, or 1208 16x16 sprites per second (at 15MHz).


Let's say, for example, that a side-scroller can display 3 16x32 enemies and 1 16x32 character on the screen at once, each being able to cover up to 6 tiles at once, which can become 32x32 when swinging his sword (in such case covering between 4 and 9 tiles at once), and that to scroll left or right, 15 extra tilemap sprites need to be updated. Since that is 52 tiles to update per frame, would such game run at 23 FPS or would the z-adress value change slow things down considerably?

I'M beginning to think that for action games that requires smooth movement, to speed things up there might be needs for shortcuts such as only updating 1 sprite location per frame, unless there are faster and more efficient ways to move a sprite around without destroying everything that's behind him.
  
Register to Join the Conversation
Have your own thoughts to add to this or any other topic? Want to ask a question, offer a suggestion, share your own programs and projects, upload a file to the file archives, get help with calculator and computer programming, or simply chat with like-minded coders and tech and calculator enthusiasts via the site-wide AJAX SAX widget? Registration for a free Cemetech account only takes a minute.

» Go to Registration page
Page 3 of 4
» All times are UTC - 5 Hours
 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 

Advertisement