N.C.D. New Calculator Day - TI 89 Titaneum

[Jlouis]

Well, just bought it out of curiosity, as I played in my Android tablet, and I Just can say: I what a mess! Very confusing... very small fonts... dwarf graphs...very menu driven...botton line: back to 48gx.

If someone has some tips, I will give a try, But I think it does not come close to HP.

Cheers

J.L.

[Dave Britten]

(06-18-2015 12:44 AM)Jlouis Wrote:  Well, just bought it out of curiosity, as I played in my Android tablet, and I Just can say: I what a mess! Very confusing... very small fonts... dwarf graphs...very menu driven...botton line: back to 48gx.

If someone has some tips, I will give a try, But I think it does not come close to HP.

Cheers

J.L.

It's really nice for programming, especially if you've got the external keyboard they produced around 10 years ago, but as you've noticed, it's pretty awful as a daily number cruncher.

The main problem is that they took an OS designed for the TI-92, which had a larger screen and a full QWERTY keyboard, and stuffed it onto hardware with a lower screen resolution and a typical calculator keypad, and made no real adaptations toward those limitations. The net result is way too much stuff crammed on screen with tiny fonts, and almost every function buried in some pop-up menu. There are so many frequently used symbols that had to be on the keyboard, that even the basic trig functions ended up being shifted, and common log wasn't even directly accessible from the keyboard until a later OS release (Diamond+7, FYI).

The alpha layout on the keyboard is pretty lousy. X, Y, Z, and T pulled out to the top row? Ugh. The alternative to using the menus - typing out function names - is just as unpleasant, honestly.

And what fool decided to have shifted functions on other shift keys? Diamond+2nd is Cut? Seriously? You can tell they were really hurting for keyboard space with all the symbols they had to provide. And alpha lock mode has a tendency to turn itself on and off at unexpected times, I've noticed.

I'd advise learning how to make custom menus, and also create kbdprgm1-6, which allow you to run programs with Diamond+1-6. You can have, for example, hotkeys that launch programs which load specific custom menus, or run your most used programs.

Oh, and the current TI-89 Titanium guidebook that's on the TI site is really bad. I don't know what happened, but the older 92 Plus/89 guidebook is far more coherent.

The programming language is admittedly pretty nice to work with, but two things particularly bother me: no nested lists (you can use a matrix, but you obviously can't have ragged columns/rows), and "data" variables, which are used in the stat editor rather heavily, are almost impossible to actually use programmatically. You can pull out a specific column as a list, but that's about it. I've never really figured out how to modify them, apart from ripping them apart, and using NewData to recreate one entirely.

On the plus side, it does have a rather nice CAS. But if I'm just doing some basic math, good lord no, give me a 32S or TI-36X Pro or something.

[Jlouis]

(06-18-2015 06:37 PM)Dave Britten Wrote:  

(06-18-2015 12:44 AM)Jlouis Wrote:  Well, just bought it out of curiosity, as I played in my Android tablet, and I Just can say: I what a mess! Very confusing... very small fonts... dwarf graphs...very menu driven...botton line: back to 48gx.

If someone has some tips, I will give a try, But I think it does not come close to HP.

Cheers

J.L.

It's really nice for programming, especially if you've got the external keyboard they produced around 10 years ago, but as you've noticed, it's pretty awful as a daily number cruncher.

The main problem is that they took an OS designed for the TI-92, which had a larger screen and a full QWERTY keyboard, and stuffed it onto hardware with a lower screen resolution and a typical calculator keypad, and made no real adaptations toward those limitations. The net result is way too much stuff crammed on screen with tiny fonts, and almost every function buried in some pop-up menu. There are so many frequently used symbols that had to be on the keyboard, that even the basic trig functions ended up being shifted, and common log wasn't even directly accessible from the keyboard until a later OS release (Diamond+7, FYI).

The alpha layout on the keyboard is pretty lousy. X, Y, Z, and T pulled out to the top row? Ugh. The alternative to using the menus - typing out function names - is just as unpleasant, honestly.

And what fool decided to have shifted functions on other shift keys? Diamond+2nd is Cut? Seriously? You can tell they were really hurting for keyboard space with all the symbols they had to provide. And alpha lock mode has a tendency to turn itself on and off at unexpected times, I've noticed.

I'd advise learning how to make custom menus, and also create kbdprgm1-6, which allow you to run programs with Diamond+1-6. You can have, for example, hotkeys that launch programs which load specific custom menus, or run your most used programs.

Oh, and the current TI-89 Titanium guidebook that's on the TI site is really bad. I don't know what happened, but the older 92 Plus/89 guidebook is far more coherent.

The programming language is admittedly pretty nice to work with, but two things particularly bother me: no nested lists (you can use a matrix, but you obviously can't have ragged columns/rows), and "data" variables, which are used in the stat editor rather heavily, are almost impossible to actually use programmatically. You can pull out a specific column as a list, but that's about it. I've never really figured out how to modify them, apart from ripping them apart, and using NewData to recreate one entirely.

On the plus side, it does have a rather nice CAS. But if I'm just doing some basic math, good lord no, give me a 32S or TI-36X Pro or something.

Thanks a lot Dave.

I will learn how to program and use the CAS.

It Is really not friendly for crunching numbers..

Warm Regards

JL

[Dave Britten]

Jlouis Wrote:  It Is really not friendly for crunching numbers..

I totally agree. If it weren't for the relatively good programmability and nice CAS, I wouldn't touch the thing. I remember when the 89 came out, my big concern was the loss of the QWERTY keyboard. I got an 89 Titanium not too long ago, and discovered my fears were well-founded. (Even the 92 Plus with full keyboard is a bit obnoxious to use.)

[Nigel (UK)]

(06-19-2015 06:33 PM)Dave Britten Wrote:  

Jlouis Wrote:  It Is really not friendly for crunching numbers..

I totally agree. If it weren't for the relatively good programmability and nice CAS, I wouldn't touch the thing. I remember when the 89 came out, my big concern was the loss of the QWERTY keyboard. I got an 89 Titanium not too long ago, and discovered my fears were well-founded. (Even the 92 Plus with full keyboard is a bit obnoxious to use.)

Well . . . I got a TI-89 shortly after it came out and I loved it at once. My eyesight was better then and I could read the small (but good contrast) display clearly without glasses (not so easy today!). I'd previously been using a TI-85 at school (I am a physics teacher). What I liked at once about the TI-89 was the fully interactive history of past inputs and outputs and how easy it was to paste a previous result into a new command. Largely because of this I found it great for doing sums.

After a while, I came to appreciate the brave decision to have X, Y, Z, T, and | as unshifted functions. This latter function in particular makes so many CAS operations flow more naturally (in my experience, at least). The CAS is good to use - not as sophisticated as some HP machines but much more straightforward and far less idiosyncratic.

I never really got into the programming language. I suppose that so many things requiring programs were already built in or could be provided with short user-defined functions. However, I remember one of my brightest students being fascinated by it and when she was bored with the pace of the class I would lend her the calculator for the lesson. She enjoyed programming it!

Nigel (UK)

[Dave Britten]

(06-21-2015 08:33 PM)Nigel (UK) Wrote:  

(06-19-2015 06:33 PM)Dave Britten Wrote:  I totally agree. If it weren't for the relatively good programmability and nice CAS, I wouldn't touch the thing. I remember when the 89 came out, my big concern was the loss of the QWERTY keyboard. I got an 89 Titanium not too long ago, and discovered my fears were well-founded. (Even the 92 Plus with full keyboard is a bit obnoxious to use.)

Well . . . I got a TI-89 shortly after it came out and I loved it at once. My eyesight was better then and I could read the small (but good contrast) display clearly without glasses (not so easy today!). I'd previously been using a TI-85 at school (I am a physics teacher). What I liked at once about the TI-89 was the fully interactive history of past inputs and outputs and how easy it was to paste a previous result into a new command. Largely because of this I found it great for doing sums.

After a while, I came to appreciate the brave decision to have X, Y, Z, T, and | as unshifted functions. This latter function in particular makes so many CAS operations flow more naturally (in my experience, at least). The CAS is good to use - not as sophisticated as some HP machines but much more straightforward and far less idiosyncratic.

I never really got into the programming language. I suppose that so many things requiring programs were already built in or could be provided with short user-defined functions. However, I remember one of my brightest students being fascinated by it and when she was bored with the pace of the class I would lend her the calculator for the lesson. She enjoyed programming it!

Nigel (UK)

Yeah, the entry history is great, though the 36X Pro matches it quite well in that regard.

One of the nicest things about the programming capabilities is that you can make programs and functions. You're a bit more limited in what you can do in a function, but they allow returning a value, and thus extending what's built in. HP users are used to this capability, though, since it's just a matter of leaving a return value on the stack.

The X, Y, Z, and T keys are nice for CAS work, but general text entry suffers. Would be interesting to see if a single multi-tap key for those variables, along with the same characters being available within the alpha layout would work better.

[W.B.Grant]

The '89 was my first graphing calculator. I spent weeks getting to grips with the thing and I still find it a clumsy, although incredibly powerful, beast.
I've since acquired an '83 and a variety of '84s, which are much nicer to use, IMO.
I use the '89 when I absolutely need CAS. For anything else an '84+CE is what I'd pick.
I agree with the positive comments made here about the TI-36X Pro. The similar TI-30XS Multiview is a nice little calc as well if you don't need calculus or complex numbers.

Regards,
WBG

[Ask Mait]

Hi,
My apologizes for pulling up this thread from the graveyard.
Wondering if somebody could compare the key-press feeling of TI-89 titanum compared to other TIs like 83+ and 84+
The reason is recently I tried my daughter's 83+ and find the keys and the large multi-line screen the best for my usage, so if the TI89 has the same key feeling, I would like to go in for that.
If it matters, let me tell that I've used Casio scientific for about 35 years (fx-82, fx-97, fx100, 991EX) and HP-35s for about 8 years.
Thanking you all in advance.

[Dave Britten]

If we're talking strictly the feel and response of the keys, the 89 Titanium does not disappoint.

However, the 89 has an obnoxious key layout, and an OS that was designed around a device with a much bigger screen, and a full QWERTY keyboard. Combine that with the single-line entry with no Math Print, and you've got a machine that, while excellent for programming and CAS work, is a pretty lousy number-cruncher.

[Manolo Sobrino]

(04-13-2018 09:20 PM)Ask Mait Wrote:  Hi,
My apologizes for pulling up this thread from the graveyard.
Wondering if somebody could compare the key-press feeling of TI-89 titanum compared to other TIs like 83+ and 84+
The reason is recently I tried my daughter's 83+ and find the keys and the large multi-line screen the best for my usage, so if the TI89 has the same key feeling, I would like to go in for that.
If it matters, let me tell that I've used Casio scientific for about 35 years (fx-82, fx-97, fx100, 991EX) and HP-35s for about 8 years.
Thanking you all in advance.

They have the same keys. Its screen is not exactly crisp and fonts are rather small. The Titanium screen is worse than that of the older TI-89s.

If you don't need the CAS, take a look at the TI-86. It has a nice screen (IMO better than the ones you've mentioned and any 89) and it's a great calculator that excels at number crunching (done right).

The keyboards in the TI graphing calculators are decent, no debouncing problems, rubber domes work forever -same technology of older Casios-, and they can be taken apart for cleaning easily (no rivets).

(04-14-2018 02:23 AM)Dave Britten Wrote:  If we're talking strictly the feel and response of the keys, the 89 Titanium does not disappoint.

However, the 89 has an obnoxious key layout, and an OS that was designed around a device with a much bigger screen, and a full QWERTY keyboard. Combine that with the single-line entry with no Math Print, and you've got a machine that, while excellent for programming and CAS work, is a pretty lousy number-cruncher.

Dave, check out Equation Writer for the TI-89 at the TI site for an alternative entry mode.

Yes, it's a CAS calculator focused on the CAS part. I think they made the right choices for a 50-key version of the 92, it's just not obvious at first sight.

[Ask Mait]

(04-14-2018 09:35 AM)Manolo Sobrino Wrote:  

(04-13-2018 09:20 PM)Ask Mait Wrote:  Hi,
My apologizes for pulling up this thread from the graveyard.
Wondering if somebody could compare the key-press feeling of TI-89 titanum compared to other TIs like 83+ and 84+
The reason is recently I tried my daughter's 83+ and find the keys and the large multi-line screen the best for my usage, so if the TI89 has the same key feeling, I would like to go in for that.
If it matters, let me tell that I've used Casio scientific for about 35 years (fx-82, fx-97, fx100, 991EX) and HP-35s for about 8 years.
Thanking you all in advance.

They have the same keys. Its screen is not exactly crisp and fonts are rather small. The Titanium screen is worse than that of the older TI-89s.

If you don't need the CAS, take a look at the TI-86. It has a nice screen (IMO better than the ones you've mentioned and any 89) and it's a great calculator that excels at number crunching (done right).

The keyboards in the TI graphing calculators are decent, no debouncing problems, rubber domes work forever -same technology of older Casios-, and they can be taken apart for cleaning easily (no rivets).

(04-14-2018 02:23 AM)Dave Britten Wrote:  If we're talking strictly the feel and response of the keys, the 89 Titanium does not disappoint.

However, the 89 has an obnoxious key layout, and an OS that was designed around a device with a much bigger screen, and a full QWERTY keyboard. Combine that with the single-line entry with no Math Print, and you've got a machine that, while excellent for programming and CAS work, is a pretty lousy number-cruncher.

Dave, check out Equation Writer for the TI-89 at the TI site for an alternative entry mode.

Yes, it's a CAS calculator focused on the CAS part. I think they made the right choices for a 50-key version of the 92, it's just not obvious at first sight.

Hello Dave and Manolo,
your comments were quite useful to me. I wanted this thing (89) basically for number crunching, but looks like I will be better off with an 83+.
TIs dont have as many math operation keys as I find on a Casio scientific but I get better key stroke feeling, larger multi-line display and rubber feet that keep the unit steady on a desk. These are the only things that matter to me.
Speed, processing power, memory, programming capabilities and graphics on a calculator are of little use to me because I prefer a desktop for those.
Once again my sincere thanks to you. Have a wonderful weekend.

[Eddie W. Shore]

I like the TI-89 because of its computing power and its ability to crunch complicated and complex equations, both numeric and symbolic.

I really don't mind the dedicated X, Y, T, and Z that much, although I prefer the traditional alpha characters placement.

I agree on the screen, the font is very small and it can't be adjusted.

[Dave Britten]

Yup, the mini font is WAY too 'mini', and used often for various UI elements.

It's an excellent machine for programming and doing CAS work - especially if you have the full-size external keyboard - but it's not one I'd keep on my desk for quick problem solving.