|
|
Post by Pure on Apr 2, 2005 11:58:26 GMT -5
Debate Topic: TI-85 and 86
Opening Question: Should TI make an update to the TI-86?
Moderators: protonpower89, bfr
Open to bcherry, moderators, vladik, AnyKey, Younglinkie, Madskillz
|
|
|
|
Post by bfr on Apr 2, 2005 12:30:41 GMT -5
Well, an upGRADE to the TI-86 isn't really needed. But who knows, maybe a TI-86 + Gold Edition would become popular.
This is my 1000th post.
|
|
|
|
Post by bcherry on Apr 2, 2005 14:38:24 GMT -5
This is a tough question, but my answer is no. The TI-86 is in a wierd position. The 83/84 line dominates the lower end (Algebra - Geometry/Trig), while the 89/92/v200 dominates the upper end (calc and beyond). The 86 is a calculator that is quite capable in the spot of the 83/84, but beyond calculus has no use really. An update to the 86 would merely provide a longer reaching alternative to the 83/84 line, and would essentially render those obsolete (assuming its not too pricey). What would make more sense is to discontinue the 86 line, and make an update/replacement to the 83/84 line in a few years that has more of the capabilities of an 86, with the memory, clock speed, and Flash of the 84 series. Of course this would essentially be an 86+, but it would be smarter not to use that name, as it implies inheritance from that line, not from the 84 line which it would truly be coming out of to replace. Then it would be the perfect calculator for causual high school math students, and could get them through calculus, and if they choose to pursue a college education in higher mathematics, they could upgrade to a TI-89.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pure on Apr 2, 2005 16:52:48 GMT -5
exactly, there are already enough calculators for all math levels around. If you want to upgrade your 84+, go to 86, then 68k!
|
|
|
|
Post by Vladik on Apr 4, 2005 18:00:28 GMT -5
The TI-86 is pretty much obsolete anyways and a 68K is a much better alternative. Hell, if you wanted to, you could buy a Voyage 200 for your kindergarden math class!
|
|
|
|
Post by Pure on Apr 4, 2005 19:09:43 GMT -5
don't exaggerate TOO much. This IS a debate, if you remember!
|
|
