This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - fb39ca4
Pages: 1 ... 107 108 [109] 110 111 ... 126
1621
« on: September 11, 2010, 01:04:16 pm »
i agree with this. the release of the nspire showed how much they wanted to limit the programming (with crap basic until os1.7) and stop people hacking into a calc. this has been discussed before. and of course TI knows (if their IQ is high enough) that people in communities such as omnimaga will always find a way to defy TI's 'orders" heheh
I wouldn't say that - more like a different feature set, just as rich but not suited to a programmers purposes.
What if they order us to defy their orders? 
But, yea, I was pretty amazed at how bleek and baron the built-in programming features were on the nspire. Even now, with the later OSes, it's still nothing compared to the programming on even a TI-81.
Soo, basically, their newest model has the worst features besides the scientific calcs...
1622
« on: September 11, 2010, 01:02:33 pm »
They are similar syntax wise, but the nspire lacks getkey and all graphical functions.
1623
« on: September 11, 2010, 12:59:28 pm »
I think what Lionel is saying is that no matter what amount of computer power we could get, it's not going to happen, not for at least 4 or 5 years, and even at that point, it will still likely take upwards 6 months to factor.
By then, we'll be on the TI-Nspire CAS Silver-Titanium Explorer Edition.
And? Even if it happens (I'm not sure about that), in 4-5 years, many students will still have TI-Nspire ClickPads, TI-Nspire Touchpads and TI-83+/84+, unless a major change in exam organisation occurs.
It's not everybody who buy the latest brand new calculator...
I agree. The 83+ keys were factored about a decade after the calc was released. I have still seen people using TI-82s. By the time it is feasible to factor the keys, we'll still be using nspires.
1624
« on: September 10, 2010, 05:41:49 pm »
But it is more likely that the factor will be around 512 bits, so the algorithm should start around there.
1625
« on: September 09, 2010, 04:32:53 pm »
She let you take a picture?
How old is she, anyways?
1626
« on: September 09, 2010, 04:31:33 pm »
Except we don't have a supercomputer at our disposal.
1627
« on: September 09, 2010, 04:25:37 pm »
If only we had a quantum computer...
1628
« on: September 07, 2010, 03:00:26 pm »
Who knows? In the future, we may feel the desire to jailbreak our toasters. Or lobster cookers.
1629
« on: September 07, 2010, 02:58:04 pm »
A gpu-based program would run faster- doesn't the GTX 480 chip have 512 processors? All of which could divide a number in a single clock cycle.
1630
« on: September 07, 2010, 02:53:49 pm »
Isn't c++ backwrds compatible with C code?
1631
« on: September 07, 2010, 12:29:55 pm »
I think we need to do like something*10^55 divisions.
1632
« on: September 07, 2010, 12:26:40 pm »
For c++, isn't it just a matter of using g++ rather than gcc?
1633
« on: September 06, 2010, 11:54:47 am »
I'm sorry too about Mapar007  I will also begin to work on the new file archives section soon, my last contribution as site manager.
Are you retiring too?
1634
« on: September 06, 2010, 11:51:07 am »
I voted for everything that won!
This calc will be awesome when it is finally done!
1635
« on: September 06, 2010, 11:47:33 am »
That would be nice.
For the 16.16 fixed point value, the range would be -32,768 to 32,767.9998...
Pages: 1 ... 107 108 [109] 110 111 ... 126
|
Show Posts