Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 7th Apr 2012 23:37 UTC
OSNews, Generic OSes "Punix is a Unix-like operating system for the Motorola M68000-based TI graphing calculators, starting with the TI-92+. It is currently under development and is not ready for widespread use yet. So far the kernel is being written, and user-space utilities and applications will follow." ...amazing.
Order by: Score:
Too bad
by Elv13 on Sun 8th Apr 2012 05:07 UTC
Elv13
Member since:
2006-06-12

Too bad they don't support my TI voyager 200 and NSPIRE-CAS 2010, I could run my Linux apps on those! Oh, wait I have a smartphone for that.

But really, nice job! Given the age of the device, it might be a little impracticable, but it is so cool. Engineering for the sake of engineering should become a law.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Too bad
by christop on Sun 8th Apr 2012 16:05 UTC in reply to "Too bad"
christop Member since:
2012-04-08

Funny that you should mention your V200. I plan to support that and the TI-89 Titanium, in addition to the TI-89, because they're similar to the 92+.

On the other hand, the nSpire has completely different hardware, so I won't support any of those models. They're a lot more powerful and have more memory than the TI-9x series, so I suspect they could even run Linux if someone wanted to port it to them.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Too bad
by dnebdal on Sun 8th Apr 2012 17:20 UTC in reply to "RE: Too bad"
dnebdal Member since:
2008-08-27

The nSpire series seem to be ARM9, so yeah - if it's possible to bodge the code on to them and they have an MMU, it should be entirely possible to run linux (or a BSD, or perhaps minix) on them.

edit:
Also, having now read a bit in your blog: That's really quite impressive. I like the "drag the parts I need out of random older UNIX and *BSD systems and reshape them"-approach. ;)

Edited 2012-04-08 17:31 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Too bad
by helf on Mon 9th Apr 2012 01:20 UTC in reply to "RE: Too bad"
helf Member since:
2005-07-06

Is the ti-92 not supported due to ram constraints?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Too bad
by Morgan on Mon 9th Apr 2012 02:40 UTC in reply to "RE: Too bad"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

And now I need to get another 92+ (I should never have sold mine after college). This is awesome work, I wish you the best with it! ;)

Reply Score: 2

Comment by Luminair
by Luminair on Mon 9th Apr 2012 03:30 UTC
Luminair
Member since:
2007-03-30

graphing calculators suck unless you are smart. get the hell out of town

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Luminair
by Elv13 on Mon 9th Apr 2012 04:23 UTC in reply to "Comment by Luminair"
Elv13 Member since:
2006-06-12

those are not "graphing calculators", they are CAS. Graph calc like TI-83 and 84 don't even have a % of the features the CAS ones have.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Luminair
by Neolander on Mon 9th Apr 2012 07:50 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Luminair"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Which is funny, considering that the HP-40G is a tangible proof that you can make a CAS run okay on weaker (and cheaper) hardware than a TI-83+.

Market segmentation is something beyond logic. I am impressed that it even works.

Edited 2012-04-09 07:51 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Luminair
by moondevil on Mon 9th Apr 2012 11:40 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Luminair"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Calculators are special, since many countries require specific models on their curriculums.

For example, in Portugal Casio has always had a preference to TI.

The FX-850P and FX-880P were very loved in the early 90's.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by Luminair
by levente on Mon 9th Apr 2012 14:15 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Luminair"
levente Member since:
2010-05-23

i really miss the calculators from the 90's... i think industrial design had a peak back than...

anyways, here is a link to a collector:
http://www.rskey.org/CMS/index.php/exhibit-hall

Edited 2012-04-09 14:15 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Back the fuck up.
by tidux on Mon 9th Apr 2012 21:47 UTC
tidux
Member since:
2011-08-13

An m68k-based graphing calculator? That's AWESOME.

Reply Score: 1