la vitesse des sprites à lécran est parfaitement exploitable dans des jeux, et à mon avis, c'est comme le dit Critor aussi, "juste" l'OS qui ne doit pas être bien optimisé. Espérons que ca change :d
Les jeunes d'aujourd'uhi sont trop habitués à leur smartphone dual-core qui forcément, se permettent des graphismes bien jolis, mais qui ne tiennent même pas une journée de batterie, par ailleurs
Edit : ca me fait penser à ce que j'ai écrit sur Omnimaga
, mais la c'est plus orienté jeux, donc c'est encore une fois une question d'OS non optimisé... :
Of course, when put next to another z80 calc, it's clear that's it's slower.
However : (and don't get me wrong, I obviously think TI should have put a better CPU >.>, but that's my personal opinion) :
We are *used* to our other z80 and prizm/nspire/etc. So any comparison we make is kind of biased already.
The thing to see would be to make someone who's never used a graphing calc before try out the 84C, and ask him for any feedback, and that is in all the domains the calc is made for : math, programming features, color-screen, big screen, etc etc.
Then, I wouldn't know if the speed issue would really come first (or at all). Maybe the lack of CAS (yes, I am talking of someone who never used a graphing calc before, so....) would come first, but then we would explain him that's normal on this type of calc, and then maybe he would tell feedback about things we wouldn't even have though about ourselves, since we cannot speak as "new" users.
As you know, TI is insisting a lot on Math and Science etc., so if we consider that part for the 84C and as experimented-users, try to "ignore" the slowness issue, it will probably get the 84C to appear as the best non-Nspire calc out there. And that's because the reaction of the reviewer isn't focused on programming easeness etc. And obviously we, programmers, are at the opposite side, since a lot of us don't even use the calc mostly for math (we probably represent less than a few percents....) Any company (especially big ones) have to go with the majority, whether that's sad or good for its end-users. I guess that's why the 84C is seen as revolutionary to the math teachers I've talked with or heard, and that do not focus on programming with it.
(the best exampel they tell you is how you can differentiate the equations drawn on the graph screen, with the color, and how "beautiful" it is compared to older models. Of course, how can you even go against that argument with other calcs ?
In conclusion, it's all a matter of point of view, and that's pretty much unarguable.
My opinion again on this calc is not really interesting since I'm not a high-schooler anymore, and pretty much all the calcs I got don' get much attention nowadays, since I actually neither don't have much time to use them, nor my school allows any for exams. Sometimes I still use my Nspire CX CAS during lessons, for practical reaons, but that's all.
For me, if I'm asked whether I'd buy this calc, I'd probably say no because I don't *need* it. If I needed a calc and was looking for math, I'd seriously consider it (ignoring the Nspire series, again). As a programmer, I would probably lean towards an 84+ Pocket SE, *for now*. ; But as a "collector", I certainly can't wait to own a 84C, so....
Edit : Oops, I forgot to talk about the slowness impacting key responses issues : that's definitely a bad point. I have kind of 0 knowledge on ASM programing, but unless the skilled community programmers find a way to fix that, it's going to be a major problem with users who get used to the calc and start typing faster than what the calc can handle (and that's getting ridiculous...). But yet again, this is addressing a very minor percentage of all users TI's targeting..