2851
[OTcalc] Z80-Software / Re: KOS - OTz80
« on: August 07, 2010, 10:16:51 pm »
I would help test, but I don't think my sis would like me screwing up her calc, and the nspire can't, right?
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. 2851
[OTcalc] Z80-Software / Re: KOS - OTz80« on: August 07, 2010, 10:16:51 pm »
I would help test, but I don't think my sis would like me screwing up her calc, and the nspire can't, right?
2852
[OTcalc] ARM-Hardware / Re: Hardware Discussion« on: August 07, 2010, 10:15:41 pm »
I think the idea was to build two, one arm, one z80, for both product lines.
ARM Cpus will almost always be better than x86 CPUs power-wise. An energy-effecient x86 CPU compared to a rather poor ARM will measure about equally. x86 focuses on backwards compatibility, so it's software is compatible across models. This also makes it very complicated and inefficient. ARM is one of the best (if not the best) CPUs for portable devices. Ultra-low power x86s are just really really weak, particularly efficient (for x86) CPUs. We can get a much more powerful ARM for less cost. If we do use an accelerometer, can we at least use a Tuning Fork gyroscope with it? (They're in the Wii motion Plus) An accelerometer by itself is much more innacurate, and it shouldn't cost too much more. Why not use a USB OTG port? They're very common, and fit both mini-A and mini-B cables, mini-A being for acting as a storage device, and B for acting as a host. They;re on the 84+, btw, as well as the 89T and nspire. 2853
OTcalc / Re: Let's build our own calculator!« on: August 07, 2010, 01:26:44 am »
Well, I was just trying to think of some way to test, without sacrificing features. I don't have any inclination towards one, just brainstorming.
I can't post any pics for my avatar on wikidot. ![]() I'm going to bed now. No more 2 second replies tonight! 2854
OTcalc / Re: Let's build our own calculator!« on: August 07, 2010, 01:09:29 am »
Well, we need to do something that seems secure. The fact is, an 83+ can run a CAS, but that didn't stop people from using it on the ACT. They just want it in the mindsets of students that the use of it shouldn't be available, not that it can't be done.
Edit: The password thing wouldn't be for OSes. It would be integrated into the default OS, like that nspire mode with the LED. I don't see that limiting other software, just that for the ACT/SAT you need to have the right OS on there. 2855
OTcalc / Re: Let's build our own calculator!« on: August 07, 2010, 01:03:22 am »
@nemo Exactly the kind of thing I was thinking of, but will we have to pay someone licensing to use it? If so (but probably not)
BTW, ACT does allow wifi, just not IR data transfer, and sound will need to be mutable. Other than that, no CAS. SAT, no electronic dictionary (because it's allowed in tests other than math.) and sound not at all, so I suggest removable speakers.) For both, no 1 inch high characters ![]() Other than that, everything won't really be an issue Full rules: ACT http://www.actstudent.org/faq/answers/calculator.html SAT http://professionals.collegeboard.com/testing/sat-subject/test-day/expect/calculators edit: I hate being ninja'd ![]() 2856
OTcalc / Re: Let's build our own calculator!« on: August 07, 2010, 12:49:37 am »
Well, if we design first, (which will take a really long time) and build later, then money issues can be resolved when we are more capable money-wise.
I think the calcs should have ACT/SAT modes, that the proctor can enter a password in the calc, and tell everyone after the test. (same pass for everyone, maybe wifi-based?) this would disable the features the teacher set (ACT no algebra, SAT has algebra allowed), and disables everything, except for wifi communication to the teacher's program only. Depending on the spread of this calc, how many we plan to sell and such, that will determine how much customization we will do, IC-wise. At least 10,000 for any custom ICs, anything less will cost us too much. Any ideas on what it will look like/be shaped like? What about a more effecient keyboard layout? The original QWERTY keyboard was actually designed to slow down first-time typers ![]() 2857
Other Calculators / Re: Where did you get your calcs from?« on: August 06, 2010, 07:13:21 pm »
TI-84+ Radio Shack (back when they sold the good stuff
![]() Stolen in middle school ![]() TI-82 borrowed from bro (mentioned in my prof) also from Radio shack Got a big bar horizontally through the screen (bad ribbon cable) TI-86 EBay Bad Ribbon cable on it too, caused a weird short of vert and horizontal sync I could flex the calc and it would fix for a while, until it stopped fixing. TI-Nspire ebay, brand new, opened with a scratch on the cover's lip for the cradle, $100! It even had all the manuals and warranty info! Love the new sig, DJ, but I can't find it on ticalc.org..... 2858
OTcalc / Re: Let's build our own calculator!« on: August 06, 2010, 07:12:58 pm »
@alberth That looks like something more beagle-boardish. Looks good, but It'll be a little too fancy for the z80 one.
Beagleboard isn't a great choice for making products. It's not the right shape (i'm assuming rectangular, or are we going 92-esque?) and it's kind of pricey. If we actually plan to sell these then we'll want to make our own board. Maybe we could design a PCB that works for both models, then populate them differently for ARM and z80. That would save some money, but we'd need to find z80 and arm processors that are the same size :p 2859
OTcalc / Re: Let's build our own calculator!« on: August 06, 2010, 02:55:00 pm »
I was just thinking, how hard will it be to port KnightOS to ARM? The hardware would obviously be very different, but the kernel could be portable, couldn't it? I don't know much in this area.
2860
OTcalc / Re: Let's build our own calculator!« on: August 06, 2010, 02:51:43 pm »
4 bit means 2^4 colors, or 16 colors. It was a standard for old computers, and viruses for windows sometimes force it into 4-bit color.
Color will really depend on the screen you choose, and the addressing capabilities of the processor to control it. high color depth on a low-res screen isn't hard for the processor, providing the screen does all the work (think like the nspire, with 16-level greyscale) Color will be a design worry, not a programming worry, and not necessarily something we need to worry about yet. 2861
OTcalc / Re: Let's build our own calculator!« on: August 06, 2010, 02:40:33 pm »
Easy (hardware-wise, not saying anything about writing the code), for ARM anyways. I'm not sure about the z80, but underclocking could work pretty well.
Edit:ninja'd 2862
Trapped for the TI-Nspire and TI-89 / Re: Trapped Nspire« on: August 06, 2010, 02:38:26 pm »
yay! more nspire games! I always loved the block-dude puzzles. Some of them took me >30 tries, and I never reached the end.
2863
OTcalc / Re: Let's build our own calculator!« on: August 06, 2010, 02:36:49 pm »
Well, if it's a real z80, then we should, maybe with really minor changes.
remember though, all of the asm written will be for a monochrome 96x64 (probably wrong ![]() ![]() 2864
OTcalc / Re: Let's build our own calculator!« on: August 06, 2010, 02:21:55 pm »
Nothing went wrong, but they had a lot of trouble along the way.
They are building them steadily right now, at around 100 per week (i think) I'm just saying we avoid some of the troubles they hit along the way. Edit: for instance, they had many troubles with lack of communication with the chinese company for the cases, and there were many issues with the shipping companies, warped boards and >1000 qty shipments left in parking lots 3 blocks from the actual delivery location, to list a few. 2865
OTcalc / Re: Let's build our own calculator!« on: August 06, 2010, 02:15:47 pm »
Nah, they won't care in that department. I'm guessing that the Manufacturing and Calculator areas don't mingle much, and the manufacturing also won't ask too many questions either. I'm guessing they won't ask too many question on what you're building.
I also suggest learning from the troubles of the Pandora story, and not to make the same mistakes. It will be a similar undertaking. |
|