Talk:TI-84 Plus series

message: While I am very much against random kids posting links to their blogs that have nearly nothing to do with the 84+, some links are being removed that would be helpful to many people visiting this page, simply because they don't provide "any more information."  Perhaps a good change would be to divide up the links section into different categories (see the 83x page for what I'm talking about).  I'm specifically talking about CalcG.org - the second largest archive of calculator programs and games that I know of, and unlike ticalc.org, it has a help forum, and it can be navigated much more easily.  There are even several hundred programs there that are unique to CalcG.org.  I'm not affiliated with CalcG.org in any way, so you can assume that this is coming from an unbiased source.  If some more people agree with me, why not either divide up the links sections or do something about this?
:It should also be noted that it is one of two external websites pointed to by Texas Instruments. (see http://education.ti.com/studentzone/stuff/gamesSoftware.html ).  If that's not enough to get a link on the wikipedia article, I don't know what is.
::Agreed.  CG has been around for nearly 6 years.  It has tutorials, a FAQ, and a forum.  Anyone looking for information about the TI-84+ would most certainly be interested in tutorials, FAQs and a forum (not to mention the archive of nearly 1,500 files, many of which are exclusive to CG).  I'm gonna go ahead and add the link back.--128.187.214.62 20:49, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Links

message: TiCalc.org no longer points to a useful site, so I have removed its link in the TI-84 series article. -Chrono 04:22, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ticalc.org has always been a useful site for calculator programs. Why was it removed? It's a very nice site and deserves to stay here. Austonst 19:41, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Original commentor's change has been reverted for a long time.--YbborT 01:31, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

text: That was the 2006 Ticalc.org April Fool's joke. Had you clicked on any of the links, you would have been taken to the real site. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 (talk) 17:38, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: TiCalc.org

message: True or false: somewhere in Wikipedia, the Vfd of TI-84 will be saved. (Several Vfd's of articles have already been saved, such as Talk:List of flags with one color/Delete. 66.245.93.86 22:06, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It finally got saved. 66.245.0.62 16:58, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Vfd for TI-84 (True or false??

message: full operating system on a calculator, vs the silliness that is the glorified TI-83 plus, I'll take fully programable OS any day, as long as I don't have to pay $180 for it (-; -- anon 03:24, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Owning both versions of the calculator, I find that the TI-83+ OS is a lot easier to use, and less counter-intuitive than TI-89's exact feature, which often confuses a lot of people when they find that 7/3 is in fact, 7/3 (no suprise there). InvertRect 23:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: However, the TI-89 does have a better screen, more advanced interface, algebra solver, no "->" symbol...I could go on for days. --Edlin2 04:41, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the 89 does have ->. But what I like about it is more RAM and extra programming capabilities. If only TI didn't fill the almost entire Flash memory with Apps or at least gave more space. --108.86.226.157 (talk) 14:22, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Bah, I still prefer the TI-89

message: There have been 1-2 models of TI graphing calculators just about every year in the range 1990-2004. Now, however, the TI-84 Plus and TI-89 Titanium continue to be the newest even though it has been 2 years since their release. What happened?? Does TI have any plans?? Georgia guy 00:21, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Future of TI graphing calculators

message: Should there not be a section for how to get apps on it? samphex 16:21, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Applications?

message: Added more depth from what I previously wrote about z80 assembly.  cjgone2  24 Novemember 2006
:Shouldn't there be a section of how to do z80 assembly?
:KevinJi9 (talk) 01:08, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Assembly

message: I am not sure if this is an appropriate place to put this.
There are two bugs I know of in the TI-84 Plus Silver. The first one is the tangent. 
When ever trying to put in a tangent instead of the known     |   |   |   |
                                                             /   /   /   /
                                                            /   /   /   /
                                                           |   |   |   | 
You will get a zigzag pattern.
The other glitch is the unability to use GraphStyle. 
 Sodaplayer  02:59, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you're talking about not graphing discontinuities, then that is not a bug, it was added to version 2.30 of the operating system. -Dlrohrer2003 16:49, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To say the least it's not a bug! It's supposed to be graphed without discontinuities; if the OP didn't know that, perhaps he or she should have paid more attention in math! As for GraphStyle, it works perfectly fine; I checked it myself. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 (talk) 17:41, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Late to the point, but perhaps previous should have paid more attention to TI graphing calculators! Many (most?) graphing calculators drew vertical lines where asymptotes should be. Users of old version of even this calculator had(have) to be careful to check their math, because asymptotes could not realiably be detected graphically.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.83.118.230 (talk) 19:53, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bugs 

message: 24 KB RAM (128 KB on Silver Edition, however the extra 96 KB is not user accessible by default)
Does that mean it's accessible with some 3rd party addon program? Or just that TI hasn't implemented it in the OS and there's no way to use it?
Maybe this should be clarified in the article.
:No, this RAM is used when a Flash APP is transfred to it in order to run-Luby  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.135.76.253 (talk) 03:14, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  RAM 

message: I do believe that this calculator normally runs on 6Mhz mode, but is able to be turned on to 15Mhz mode.  Shouldn't this be added the page?  -Luby  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.135.76.253 (talk) 03:16, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it normally runs in 15MHz mode when doing calculations (note the capitalization--the H is capitalized because the original symbol for Hertz is Hz). When assembly-language programs are run, the calculator switches to 6 MHz to maintain compatibility with games and other programs requiring 6 MHz timing. This can be toggled with a BCALL, if i'm not mistaken... --M1ss1ontomars2k4 (talk) 17:36, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Processor 

message: I am not sure if teachers or much of the public knows about the solve statement programmed into the calculator. Im also wondering if any teachers know of its existence. Its very handy. (Im not talking about the Solver programmed already on there, Im talking about the solve(Y1-Y2,X,1.)
You just put the left side of the eq into Y1 and the right into Y1 and it solves for X after you complete the statement above. Its better than whats programmed in already cause one side does not have to be zero.DelvarMe (talk) 16:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the same as the graphical solver (2nd Calc intersection) already present. The syntax for the solve() command is equation that equals zero, the independent variable, and a guess. The calculator will substitute values approximately equal to your guess until finds a number that causes the equation to equal zero. If you already have a guess, then the solve() feature is more handy than graphing and zooming in/out until you see the intersection. If you don't already know what to put for a guess, then you might as well just use the graphical version. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 (talk) 17:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Solve =

message: For some reason this:
"Unfortunately the TI-84 will be made exam illegal for GCSE, GCE AS & A Level exams starting in 2009."
was in the assembly language section. I do not think that that is the appropriate section
98.221.116.93 (talk) 22:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assembly Language 

message: Should we split the introduction into a TI-84+ section and a TI-84+SE section, and replace it with a more brief description? The TI-83 series article already follows this scheme. Nerdygeek101 (talk) 18:53, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sections 

message: I don't think that an example of code should be included in the article. Examples analogous to the one in this article don't exist in any other Texas Instruments calculator article. Also, it doesn't add any sort of understanding of the calculator series. I think that just the paragraph mentioning assembly is good enough. I've deleted the section of code; if you don't agree then undo and give your argument.Shoveldude (talk) 03:41, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assembly Code? 

message: The TI-84 Plus features and advertises an 'improved' screen. Having used the TI-83 and the TI-84, I can verify this, as can TI's website. However, Wikipedia doesn't mention this, nor does it mention what kind of screen. Could somebody fix this? 24.32.205.164 (talk) 08:16, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Display 

message: I added a reference for the statement: "All calculators with the letter H or later as the last letter in the serial code have less ram pages causing some programs to fail." Unfortunately, the best I could do was a trial of several different calculators (with different last letters in the serial number) that was posted on the forum. I know it's not ideal, and I won't start an edit war if someone puts a different link up. This is only temporarily used as a source until someone can use a vetter reference. cymru lass (hit me up)⁄(background check) 00:32, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  TI-84 serial number/RAM connection 

message: http://www.engadget.com/2012/11/13/texas-instruments-confirms-color-ti-84-calculator-is-on-track-f/
Is this news site often wrong?? Georgia guy (talk) 00:12, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't realize Wikipedia already had this calculator mentioned! This is surprising, because we know the sequence:
# TI-81
# TI-82
# TI-83
# TI-83 Plus
# TI-84 Plus
# TI-Nspire with Clickpad
# TI-Nspire with Touchpad
# TI-Nspire CX
The next member should be an upgrade to the TI-Nspire CX, but it looks like it's wrong. It's the TI-84 Plus C. Georgia guy (talk) 00:15, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  TI-84+C 

message: I feel that this article should be merged with TI-83 series because the two calculators are really one big series. It would also help people compare the technical details of the whole line by having the two pages merged together.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:249:D00:78:BD74:2AB2:1585:F3CE (talk) 01:06, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposition to Merge Article with TI-83 Series 

message: Is the TI-84 as widely used in high school math classes as it seems? I would like to find a reliable source for this but all I have been able to find is blogs without hard numbers. Ungulates (talk) 17:25, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Usage 

message: Hardware-wise, the TI-84 Plus CE is very different from previous models in the TI-84 Plus series, as it uses an eZ80-based architecture rather than a Z80-based one. The 84+CE is nearly identical to the TI-83 Premium CE, its French variant, which already has its own page. Additionally, a Python-enabled variant of the TI-84+CE will release soon, which will further make it more similar to the 83PCE than to the previous calculators in the TI-84 Plus line.
In my opinion, the CE calculators should thus both be on one page, separate from the rest of the 84+ line.
--Commandblockguy (talk) 20:27, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to move the TI-84+CE section to the TI-83 Premium CE page