Hacker News Reader

Comment by snvzz | Hacker News Reader

For anybody considering one of these, I'd suggest taking a look at the vastly superior (in functionality) m68k-based TI-89 or voyage 200 instead.

Used, they do cost a fraction of what these fancy revisions of the TI-84 do.

Being powered by anything more than a few AAA batteries should be an obvious red flag.

View on HN

Honestly the issue is that schools don't want calculators (computers) that are too powerful because there could be an app that can just do the homework for students, or let them communicate during exams, or search on the internet. So schools intentionally prefer crippled devices, hence the relatively high price for an underpowered device.

There's not really any good solution to this either without completely overhauling the system (i.e. making things worse for a few years until things stabalize and the kinks are worked out in primary school math education 2.0), so we're at a local maximum.

I don't get your point about batteries though. Calculators are heavily used by the students, so are the perfect place to have a rechargeable. It looks like it's even replaceable too. Throw in usb-c charging, and you've got something that can be charged pretty much anywhere that a phone can.

Not sure what you're talking about. Those calculators don't have any networking.

The Ti-89 has a fairly powerful symbolic algebra system (that allowed me to get through pre-calc without memorizing the identities I would later need for physics and other related classes)

Also there are some IR networking libraries http://sami.ticalc.org/irlink/

>Also there are some IR networking libraries.

They require additional hardware, for IR.

TI-89 does not have an IR interface built in.

I'm pretty sure I got through 11 years of schooling without ever recharging my calculator... And I spent a lot of time trying to see what calculation would take it the longest to answer too...

A lot of the reason why the curriculum is the way it is (with only allowing graphing calculators) is because TI lobbies aggressively to maintain their monopoly. They sell $15 devices for $150 with many high schoolers required to own one.

From https://thehustle.co/graphing-calculators-expensive/:

> The company campaigned against devices with touchscreens, internet connection, and QWERTY keyboards. In one instance, it even lobbied the Texas legislature to make it mandatory for all students to take Algebra II — a course that often requires the use of a TI graphing calculator.

> “A lot of [TI’s] graphing calculator success was due to really aggressive lobbying for certain policies,” a source in the education space told The Hustle. “They made it so that that the types of things you were allowed to bring into a test were essentially limited to their devices.”

There's free alternatives that others are increasingly turning to, like an app-based graphing calculator through https://www.desmos.com/

> ... campaigned against devices with touchscreens, internet connection, and QWERTY keyboards ...

I dislike touch screen, and I would prefer to use wired rather than wireless connections when possible, although I do want a QWERTY keyboard.

(I also would prefer a different programming language than Python, such as Forth, and would prefer access to the machine codes too.)

On the TI-84+, assembly programs still work and it's still a test-approved device. I wrote a Forth interpreter[0] that can interop with the syscalls as well

[0] https://github.com/siraben/ti84-forth

I don't understand the QWERTY thing. Don't they make TI calculators with QWERTY keyboards?

TI-89 exists because TI-92 was classified as "computer" rather than "calculator" due to its QWERTY keyboard.

I know that's the reason, and it makes no sense. You'd think educators would know enough to know that they're both computers and having a QWERTY keyboard doesn't make it any easier to cheat.

It must just be my imagination, but it sure seems like I remember getting through high school math (up to and including first-year calculus) without a graphing calculator, as they didn't exist.

That just means you didn't get bitten by the lobby monster.

Like not living on US.

TI doesn't have monopoly outside US.

Yet HP and Casio alternatives aren't much different, because of the same education reasons.

You don't even need an app. I had a Ti-89 in high school and it can solve pretty much every high school and early college math problem for you out of the box, including simplifying expressions, solving equations, and taking derivatives and definite/indefinite integrals -- as long as you're willing to take the time to type it in. (In practice, it was usually faster to solve it myself.)

The TI-84 is generally considered a very safe choice for exams and standardized tests. Yet, I always had a copy of Symbolic installed on mine. https://www.ticalc.org/archives/files/fileinfo/228/22851.htm...

Since you mentioned the Voyage 200, you (or others) may be interested in an emulator I wrote a few years ago:

https://github.com/duskwuff/v200

And I did a quick and dirty Emscripten port to make it work in the browser:

https://woofle.net/v200/

Also, there is the 68k cross-compiling port of gcc (TIGCC, tigcc.org) that lets you write programs in C for the 68k-based calculators. And I have to say that I find the TI system API easier to deal with than its HP equivalent.

No Python on these although I love the TI CAS.

There's gcc. Someone ported micropython, but I haven't ever tried it.

They still make the Voyage 200? That's hilarious, what a blast from the past.

Yeah, it's a shame that the standard never shifted towards QWERTY calculators and away from the TI81-type design

I don't think they do. It's no longer shown on TI's product page:

https://education.ti.com/en/products

I wonder if the battery is replaceable?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com