Subject:
|
Lego Compatible (was Re: JCX and Legos...)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 9 Sep 2004 00:37:22 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
864 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.robotics, Mark Tarrabain wrote:
> Rob Limbaugh wrote:
[snip JCX schedule comments]
> > Apparently, if one really wants a JCX, they need to build their own...
>
> Agreed. Which is unfortunate... the concept is a good one... a powerful
> alternative to the RCX that still retains a focus on lego compatibility.
> (and before someone brings it up, the handyboard suffers from a
> serious lack of "legoness", IMO).
I'm just curious what constitutes a system that is Lego
compatible enough?
-Wayne
[snip loss of hope]
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Lego Compatible (was Re: JCX and Legos...)
|
| (...) Fair question. In this context, I would say that it is a unit that directly supports LEGO motors and sensors right out of the box. The Handyboard motor outputs may be electrically compatible with LEGO motors, but the unit lacks physical (...) (20 years ago, 9-Sep-04, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: JCX and Legos to appear in Denmark next week
|
| (...) Of course, as the dates on all as yet incomplete portions are crossed out with no tentative new estimates for completion, the schedule is basically worthless. (...) Agreed. Which is unfortunate... the concept is a good one... a powerful (...) (20 years ago, 8-Sep-04, to lugnet.robotics)
|
9 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
