[Tuto] [EN/FR] Install nLoader / TI-Nspire CX

→ **MyCalcs** profile · by **parrotgeek1** » 27 Feb 2018, 08:48

Lionel Debroux wrote:
2) in beta 2, there will be support for non cas os on cas calculators. Currently there isn't.

Why not

Literally only because I haven't had time to make the patches.

→ **MyCalcs** profile · by **parrotgeek1** » 27 Feb 2018, 08:53

[deleted banter]

→ **MyCalcs** profile · by **critor** » 27 Feb 2018, 09:24

Lionel Debroux wrote:
Excale made a similar choice years ago with Nlaunchy, patching OSes to completely forbid OS updates.

Well, that was the right thing to do to protect the vast majority of users from a trivial way to remove the effect of nLaunchy. It's a fact that some use cases became harder as a result.

Sorry but it was a very bad decision, and saying the opposite won't make this different.

That was bothering every user, by altering the expected OS behaviour without any information/error message, to protect... nothing ?

- Makes updates/downgrades even to OS supported by Nlaunch* harder, nonsense.
- Forces you to use the maintenance menu and thus completely remove Nlaunch* for each OS transfer, which is a pain !
- Doesn't prevent anything since the maintenance menu is publicly documented.
- Prevents apps installations (like the english-chinese dictionnary)
- Prevents the affected calculators from being able to dump OSes via USB

If a user was asked to uninstall Nlaunch*, he couldn't easily. If an exam proctor wanted to remove Nlaunch*, he couldn't.
Result ? Being unable to comply, the user probably had to take his tests without a calculator.
That was not protecting users at all in my opinion.

→ **MyCalcs** profile · by **Lionel Debroux** » 27 Feb 2018, 09:57

parrotgeek1 wrote:
Lionel Debroux wrote:As I wrote earlier, this would make you so toxic and damaging for the whole TI community that sadly, your binaries containing such features would have to be removed from the main sites if they were somehow uploaded there

"If" they were uploaded? You haven't noticed them yet?

Of course I had. But playing dumb and using nicer wording was the way I chose to play this part

And you played dumb, too: your post is an explicit admission that you're not following the rules. I don't care whether that was incompetence or malice, the end result shall be the same for the dangerous part of your work - as much as I hate it, again.

P.S. I spent a LONG time adding that warning screen and the special license in order to deter cheating on exams.

Sounds hypocritical, you know pretty well how people care about licenses. Yes, they'll be the ones facing the consequences of their actions, but still.

Please stop replying to my posts saying the same things over and over.

Well, we'll keep repeating the same thing, more or less in the same terms, until in our backyard (you are free to behave in other ways outside the TI community), you do what you need to do and you don't do what you need not to do... or you are coerced into that.

→ **MyCalcs** profile · by **parrotgeek1** » 27 Feb 2018, 10:00

[deleted banter]

→ **MyCalcs** profile · by **Lionel Debroux** » 27 Feb 2018, 10:06

"We" seems to be just you...

Nope, Adriweb was also pretty clear in another thread about what's OK and what's not. Plus I know from other conversations.

→ **MyCalcs** profile · by **critor** » 27 Feb 2018, 10:13

I can see no real threat, @parrotgeek1, since it won't change the existence of your great work.

It's true that I would have preferred for the CAS calculations patches to be kept outside of the boot loader, since they aren't boot-related, as you mentioned some weeks ago in several posts, and as it was the case until you added them last week-end to the source if I'm not mistaken.

But having a boot loader for CX HW-W+ users, thus a huge majority nowadays, is still much better than nothing.

If nBoot4 had been developed/released, ControlX would have been updated for it and it would have kept being as 'clean'.
Whoever was behind nBoot made a very bad decision on the strategic point of view, when deciding not to release an nBoot4 update, keeping aside all owners of CX calculators assembled since october 2015 (2 years and a half...), an unfair situation which just very logically led us to today's situation.

→ **MyCalcs** profile · by **Lionel Debroux** » 27 Feb 2018, 10:21

If nBoot4 had been developed/released, ControlX would have been updated for it and it would have kept being as 'clean'.
Whoever was behind nBoot made a very bad decision on the strategic point of view, when deciding not to release an nBoot4 update, keeping aside all owners of CX calculators assembled since october 2015 (2 years and a half...), an unfair situation which just logically led us to today's situation.

We're in what-if arguing territory here...

The availability of a "nBoot4" would have made it easier for people who aim at enabling cheaters (whether they pretend this isn't true is irrelevant), since they wouldn't even have had to develop their own framework, as occurred here (after stupidly burning a powerful exploit publicly).

→ **MyCalcs** profile · by **critor** » 27 Feb 2018, 10:26

Nobody ever developed another loader than ControlX for nBoot3.
So I still think the situation would have been much better.

When a situation is unfair, and that you refuse to even move a finger, be sure other people will do it - but possibly not the way you would have done it.
It's just logic, and it was a huge strategic error in the community.

→ **MyCalcs** profile · by **critor** » 27 Feb 2018, 11:39

@parrotgeek1
I've newsed about your great tool and its dedicated tutorial, but only in french for now :
viewtopic.php?p=227559#p227559

I need to complete the tutorial translation now.