Quote from: [email protected] on March 17, 2013, 12:05:42 pm

HP calculators are wayyyy different from any device I am used to o.0 It seems to have lots and lots of functionality/programmability. Perhaps there is an HPcalc.org?

That was the goal of HP : teach students programming. Unlike TI who makes their calcs less and less programmer friendly.

TI panders to tests. I hate that. I mostly used Symbloic, Omnicalc, and other math apps for my tests last week.

Exactly. Thanks ThePenguin77! hehe

Here's my opinion on different models. Note that I don't own all of them.

Math : Definitely the TI-68k series and CAS HP calcs. They have a very friendly UI for this purpose. The Nspire CAS has Ndless menus so it's not very handy. The TI-z80 series has only a floating point math engine which is not interesting at my school level. It's great for physics though.

Programming : The TI-z80 series (especially 83+/84+) are very programmable since they have BASIC (slow but nice for heavy math), and support native execution with ASM and Axe. There are also third party interpreted languages such as Grammer and BBC BASIC, and BASIC expansions such as XLib/Celtic/Omnicalc/BatLib.
The TI-68k series has ASM, C, BASIC and NewProg (like Axe for this series of calcs). Only the last two are on calc though.
The HP-50G looks awesome for that purpose too, especially since it has equivalent on-calc programming possibilities to the TI-z80s.
Casio calcs have native prog and BASIC too even though the editor is even worse than on TI-z80s. There is LuaZM for Lua, too. On calc native programming is not here yet though.
The Nspire requires a PC to program it in ASM/C and Lua so don't think about it.

Power : Definitely the Nspire CX. It's currently the most powerful calc out there. Then come the PRIZM and HP-50G, the TI-68k and last but not least the TI-z80s.

Hacking : TI calcs are 100% proprietary and officially undocumented calcs, a lot of research is being done on them. We already found a lot about the z80s though, but the Nspire is fairly recent and we have yet to factor it's RSA keys.

Hope this can help you choose !

The TI-68k series has ASM, C, BASIC and NewProg (like Axe for this series of calcs). Only the last two are on calc though.

While it has few users, partly because someone tried every trick to belittle and delay it, there's GTC

I like nspire cx personally, programming on the computer doesnt bother me

It's entirely your right not to care about the TI-68k series... but then, please use proper arguments

They are just underdocumented and nobody likes them for programming.

The cold hard fact is, while TI-68k calculators aren't popular nowadays, they remain far better documented for programming than Nspire calculators are... If you really hate under-documented, under-loved platforms, than neither the Nspire series, nor the Prizm series, should be a priority for you - you should care about the TI-Z80 and TI-68k series instead !

Educate yourself with the GCC4TI documentation (online version: http://debrouxl.github.com/gcc4ti/ ), the hardware documentation far more complete than that of the more complex Nspire ( http://tict.ticalc.org/docs/J89hw.txt ), etc.

Axe isn't native! It requires to have it on calc, or even requires some shell of some kind, unless you compile fo noshell (which is the way to go unless speed or memory is a main concern.).

Axe is a compiled language, so once compiled, any Axe program is an ASM program, in native language. And you absolutely don't need the Axe application to run compiled Axe programs, only programmers need the app to compile but launching the compiled product doesn't need Axe. And you don't need a shell if the program was compiled as an app or for NoShell (and this also applies for ASM programs, not only Axe programs).
And you said that compiling for NoShell is the way to go, but not necessarily. I'd say that compiling for Ion is better because the program could still be launched via the ASM command and it will also be displayed by MirageOS, so everyone will be able to launch it

Programming on the computer does, indeed, bother me. An oncalc program editor or even a simple text editor combined with a compiler would be the absolute LEAST I would require. Maybe some days I would write down an idea and then type it up on the computer, but I really prefer oncalc programming. The two long posts about the calculators were extremely helpful. I already know a lot about the Ti8x series, and have 4 members. A Ti82 of mine is hiding in my brother's room.

So the nSpire has some nice UI tricks that I can pick up to make MATH significantly easier, and unless I get serious about programming, those things are best left to the experts, whereas the Casio Prizm is great for the whole oncalc programming thing.
68k calculators will never enter my home unless I have every other kind of calculator out there. I do not, I repeat DO NOT, care about them. They are just underdocumented and nobody likes them for programming.

To respond: The 68k calcs have fallen out of favor, but then again TI isn't really been advertising or promoting them for some time. The french community has also always been more active with the 68k series it seems. They have been around forever though, so I'd imagine they are quite thoroughly documented.

Axe isn't native! It requires to have it on calc, or even requires some shell of some kind, unless you compile fo noshell (which is the way to go unless speed or memory is a main concern.). But I see that variables work the same way on the CX CAS as they do in Axe. HELPFUL! What is the maximum size integer and most precise number that you can work with on each calculator?
I'm getting a lot of feedback from a lot of people!!

It's true that Axe isn't built in. You only need it on calc to compile the source though. As far as exection of programs go Axe and Asm are exactly the same. They can either be nostub, compiled for a shell, or an app.

In response to your original question:

The Prizm and the CAS version of the Nspire aren't really comparable. If you were to compare the Prizm to anything, it'd have to be the normal Nspire CX or a TI-84+/ TI-84+ CSE.

Concerning on calc programming:

-The Nspire has Nspire BASIC which from what I understand is ok for math, but next to useless for much else. I think there is a third party editor for LUA, but TI has not provided one. On the PC side, you can do C or ARM ASM.

-The Prizm has Prizm BASIC, and some drawing commands are quite slow unfortunately. You have a Prizm version of Lua, but I can't remember if it has an on calc editor or not. On the pc again you have C and Assembly.

-The 84+ CSE has BASIC. Most commands that display things have been shown to be slow. (Output for example)On the PC side you have ASM. At this point it is unknown if and when Axe will be ported. I wouldn't be surprised to see some other languages popping up, but time will tell.

Honestly the classic Z80 series has the highest programmablity on  calc. You have BASIC, ASM, Axe, grammer, and batlib. For BASIC you also have the Celtic III/Xlib to add additional functionality.

As far as specs go, as others have mentioned the Nspire wins. It has the fastest processor and the most storage space. It also has a decent color display at 320x240 resolution.

The Prizm has a decent processor, but only 16 MB memory. It has a very high color display resolution though at 396×224.

The TI-84+ CSE comes in last with only 3MB memory. It has a 320x240 pretty color display, but only a 15Mhz Z80 backing it up.

Although the Nspire is constantly being upgraded and having Ndless(which allows C and ASM programs to be executed) blocked, I'd say it's probably the best choice of the batch, as long as you don't mind programming on computer. If you are set on programming on calc, I'd stick with the classic Z80 series right now. It's the most supported and has tons of options. 68k is an options as well. Honestly it has an extremly powerful form of BASIC built in that allows manipulation of pictures among other things. There is also Newprog which can be done oncalc. On the PC side you have 68k ASM and C yet again.

I don't really do much regarding math, so I can't really weigh in there. That's about all I have to add.

Oh, and since I haven't said it yet, welcome to Omnimaga!