Started by Dream of Omnimaga, January 09, 2017, 07:03:33 AM
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Total Members Voted: 23
Voting closed: January 16, 2017, 07:03:33 AM
Quote from: p4nix on January 10, 2017, 01:39:38 PMBlame yourself
Quote from: kotu on January 11, 2017, 09:05:48 PMwithout C SDK and Libraries I would be a useless man
Quote from: DJ Omnimaga on January 13, 2017, 04:52:13 PM@gbl08ma worse than this, there are rumors that a new Prizm with zero add-in support is coming out soon >.<
Quote from: gbl08ma on January 13, 2017, 05:16:48 PMQuote from: DJ Omnimaga on January 13, 2017, 04:52:13 PM@gbl08ma worse than this, there are rumors that a new Prizm with zero add-in support is coming out soon >.<I guess people who want to be able to run custom software on their own calcs that is not Casio's slow-as-molasses basic, will just choose TI instead. I find TI's software to be way less user friendly, and the hardware specs on their non-Nspire lines are way worse, but if that's what it takes...The Casio calculator community has always been much smaller than the one for TI calcs: there are fewer users and fewer projects. I find the Casio calcs to be much nicer to program than Z80-based TI ones (more memory, you can use C and even parts of C++ without issue...), and easier than Nspire ones (no need for calculator "jailbreaking"). But the set up and learning curve is way worse: you have to set up a SDK (or in the case of the Prizm, a "development environment" that basically revolves around some fork of libfxcg, or if you want to be 5 years in the past, Simon's hacked together stuff), figure out how to program in C (vs. using Basic on a TI calc which already gives decent performance), etc. In that aspect the classic TI calcs are easier - you don't even need a computer.To sum this paragraph up, I find Casio and Nspire calcs to be easier to develop for if you already know how to code and have some experience around a command line, be it Linux or not. TI's non-Nspire are better to get random strangers into programming.Such a move against 3rd-party software can alienate some customers, even those that would not care about calc games and such things. I remember that back in high school few people installed add-ins/games, and the people who did, often forgot about them - after all, if you have a smartphone and are already well trained in hiding it during class, what's the advantage? However, if at the time of choosing between two models/brands, word had spread that one of them didn't allow games or whatever, I can totally see people going for the one that supported them even if they ended up making zero use of that "feature" throughout their high school years - just because it seems appealing at the beginning.Fortunately the "niche" of attracting young people to learn programming and introduce them to the Von Neumann and Havard architectures (i.e., basically learning how today's computers perform their magic) seems to have been more or less fulfilled by cheap SBCs like the raspi, or the desire to build yet another Android game. The hard task is getting those SBCs into the hands of people, or getting users to know that yes, they too can make apps, that it's not a superhuman-exclusive activity, that computers are not TV and allow for more than content consumption.In other words, calcs getting more and more closed down is not the end of the world, except maybe if your main goal was to cheat in exams. But everyone, including calc makers, must keep in mind that some people will always find a way.Oh my gosh this just turned into a huge rant... but all of this highlights the importance of recognizing independent development and I think things like the CW project awards are a great way to do that.
Page created in 0.088 seconds with 37 queries.