C21 as C21 textures? Yeah, the future, simple and pretty!Paired with CalcBox, it is :) Plus the ability to get apps directly to your calc, socialize, and others. But it's your opinion - what are the disadvantages?
C21 as in Calculator to Internet, I don't know... It can be done, I'm sure but is it that important? Most normal calculator users wouldn't use it, since it doesn't have many obvious advantages.
Hmm I have mixed feeling about this. If by user-friendlier you mean for example that on the TI-84+ you wouldn't need any extra hardware such as an arduino and just connect through USB, then it might be nice to see this come to fruition, but on the other hand, Kerm is still actively working on gCn, so maybe in the future he will have implemented that. Also, gCn and CALCnet projects have been in the works for years now (despite a hiatus around 2008-2009), so not only it would be kinda odd to some people to see a project by a Cemetech staff compete directly against another Cemetech staff's, but the fact Kerm has thought about gCn and worked on it every now and then since years ago tells me that this was a really ambitious project, and that you'll effectively need a lot of experience in calc programming and networking to get internet on your calculator.Nope - I mean user friendly as in easy to use, with social networking built in and such. Plus that too, but as I've said, he's actively working on the USB port gCn.
On the other hand, I guess maybe you could join gCn development to help with new ideas and features. Regardless, if you decide to take on a gCn-like project, I wish you good luck.
That said, I wonder if this is in any way related to your calc server project a few months ago? I think Graphmastur was working on it with you, right? http://ourl.ca/6452/104579
Paired with CalcBox, it is Plus the ability to get apps directly to your calc, socialize, and others. But it's your opinion - what are the disadvantages?
normal users... what are normal users... :P i am not a normal user and i will use it for sure!
I think you should seriously consider continuing it for 2 reasons, the first being as you said, it is fundamentally different than gCn, in that is more an Internet connection deal, while gCn is more just a way to extend Cn to more than just a LAN, with indirect consequences leading to being able to be able to access internet resources if the server endpoint is configured correctly. The other one is the fact that you plan on having some sort of app, but also an includable version for developers, which, in my opinion outweighs having to have the weight DCS if you really are only using for that one program which might not need DCS otherwise. I could be wrong though, if that all sounds uninformed and stupid, please disregard :)You're pretty much right - probably the only thing I will add is that it's not just a server endpoint - the client part can let the calculator access any server/website directly. (It's not just calc to another calc on the internet!)
Ehh... not really. My friends tend to be very interested in having Facebook on their calc. :)QuotePaired with CalcBox, it is Plus the ability to get apps directly to your calc, socialize, and others. But it's your opinion - what are the disadvantages?
WOAH That seems interesting, but not sure if normal users would use it (my friends went 'WTF?, Why would you need that? You're such a nerd!'). So yeah maybe.
normal users... what are normal users... :P i am not a normal user and i will use it for sure!Thanks! :D I hope you'll enjoy it as I do.... if this gets developed, that is. :P
I think that people would use a Calc-to-Internet for two reasons:Ehh... that depends. You would need CalcBox; otherwise, the other way is via computer (USB cable).
- Because they don't have ready access to a computer (e.g. they are in a classroom)
- Because it's freakin cool!
To make this really useful, you would probably want a Bluetooth or WiFi adapter to connect to the link port so that you could access the Internet wherever, such as in an airport. However, this could have possible reprecussions, like graphing calculators becoming banned from the SAT. :(
Not really - if it meant accessing Facebook, plenty of users may shell out some cash. ;)normal users... what are normal users... :P i am not a normal user and i will use it for sure!
Yup, normal users wouldn't, especially if it required extra pieces :S
One issue that sometimes arises is people under 18 who have parents that disallow them to buy stuff online, but have no access to the required equipment in local stores or have access to it but the store sells it for $100 higher. It also needs to be simple to setup, otherwise only people experienced with electronic (or willing to learn that stuff and mess with wires) can use it.I don't think I'll sell this in stores (it would be kinda awkward and I might run into legal trouble). I know what you mean by the high prices - countries other than the U.S. tend to have higher prices due to importing costs and such. :( If I ever sell this in stores, I'll keep that in mind.
Nah about stores I meant how gCn requires an arduino or other extra hardware. Some people won't live near a store that sells those and they can't get a credit card. Kerm is planning to try adding USB support, though, so that shouldn't be as much of a problem for younger people.Ahh I see. The big selling point for C2I used to be that it would not require a Arduino (e.g., just using a DirectLink, GraphLink, etc.), but as you and I know, KermM is adding USB support after me and other people's begging. ;)
Unfortunately I don't have any other ideas yet, though :(
Yeah same here. The issue, though, is that most people who want to connect their calc to the Internet just wants to do that/play games online. The problem in this case is that most of your projects posts tends to be unnecessarily long (no offense) and from experience, on large forums people dislike reading walls of text. If they cannot find a 2-3 paragraph summary of a project and screenshots they migth simply ignore the thread altogether. I know myself I used to not reply to E:SoR updates just for that reason. Posts were simply TL;DR. Often I simply said nice to see new progress.Ahh, I see. I don't take any offense though - my initial thought is that technical stuff would attract some people, especially developers. In the end though, the project really more of less appeals to general users than developers (I'd say 60%/40%).
Another issue is that it's very technical and most people here are new to that kind of project, so they might take a while to understand, especially that there are no picture.
In other words it might not be that nobody is interested, it might be just that people simply don't have the time to dechiper every technical detail about the project.
What DJ said is very true.To tell you the truth, I kinda hate ASM. (OK, not hate, it's just not really my preferred language.) I would have rather code this in Axe, but it isn't powerful enough yet to do what I need it to do (mainly the USB/IO stuff). To be slightly technical, it's basically port modifying. We'll probably see that in Axe 2.0. ;)
I don't know any ASM, and I'm positive Axe wouldn't be up to a project like this, plus I'm not very experienced with electronics and hardware. Otherwise, I would love to help with the technical side of this. Right now, all I can do is offer support and my interest.