Talk:Casio graphic calculators
| WikiProject Computing | (Rated Start-class, Low-importance) | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||||||||||||
Contents |
[edit] AFX and bad flash
Can anyone tell my from where the rumour comes that the AFX has a flash memory of inferior quality that makes it inoperative after a few years? When I asked CASIO about this, they denied there was any truth in this. Also, on the internet there has been stated that the AFX is slower than the 9850 series. I fail to see how that would be true, since at least my 9850GB+ and 9970G are slower than my AFX 2.0 when it comes to massive programmed calculations, such as probability calculations and prime factorisation. (However a clogged or not optimised RAM memory on the AFX seems to slow it down a bit, at least when operating the menus.) I see both these claims over and over on the net, but no one seems to have any decent source about this. Aren't these just rumours without any facts to support them? Victor b04 (talk) 00:42, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
[edit]
I had a AFX 2.0 calculator, and I could see the real operating-system of this machines is a very lite version of ROM-DOS. It contains a lite version of COMMAND.COM (without any built-in commands), a tiny BIOS which even replaces IBMDOS.SYS and IBM.SYS, but uses the standard CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT to load the flash driver, set some variables and loads the AFX GUI (splited in two programs) that is no more than a standard MS-DOS aplication. Also it acts as a TRS program, prevent when an applications finishes to return to command prompt, and it will load the AFX GUI again. All maths software is located in several EXE that act more like dinamic libraries. Any add-in applications is just DOS programs that uses the AFX API. Basically Casio uses a standard operating system, but create some tricks to prevent normal users to go to command prompt level.
[edit] fx-CG10 or fx-CG 10?
The model names of the Prizm calculators (fx-CG10 and fx-CG20) can be spelled either without a space before the number, or with a space. Casio seems to use the fx-CG10/fx-CG20 form in pretty much all of their documentation and such. The place where the space is most prominent is the front of the calculator itself, but I'm not sure if it should be written like fx-CG 10/fx-CG 20 since there are other odd quirks when it comes to how the model name is written on the calc itself, such as the fx being italicized and the G being more bold than the C, which leads to something like "fx-CG 10". Any thoughts on this? JosJuice (talk) 07:44, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Undid revision
Various external links were removed citing WP:EL
However, apart from the newest Prizm fx-CG section, the rest of the article is largely based on two of the removed references:
- History of Casio Calculators
- Model Numbers Equivalence Table
Therefore I have reinstated the links. You won't find any official Casio website that supports the content of this article because Casio's website doesn't cover the oldest models. 92.40.56.208 (talk) 19:22, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
