| |
In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Chris Magno writes:
> I'm going to have to agree with Rob on this one.
>
> What fun will it be if we all showed up with a stacker based on David's,
>
> bot???
>
> what can we learn? I can only say this again, and again, I like the
> games 'cause I get the chance to learn how other people solved problems.
We learn how to put things together better. Taking working concepts and
integrating them together is a big development task alone. A good example
is the day I came by to see your paddle sorter and summarily used it on our
robots along with a drive gearing much like Rob Adema's. Did we come up
with it all? No. Did it work better than the sum of it's parts? I'd like
to think so-because it takes time to refine and pull together that complete
package.
While I'm against making complete copies of the Runamok bot, there's so many
dimensions that can be improved on-for example, maybe from a software
standpoint for game strategy.
So I wouldn't discount the concept of utilizing proven, working mechanisms.
Many American firms had to deal with NIH syndrome (Not Invented Here) and
put out a lot of crappy products as a result.
Calum
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: finally
|
| I'm going to have to agree with Rob on this one. What fun will it be if we all showed up with a stacker based on David's, bot??? what can we learn? I can only say this again, and again, I like the games 'cause I get the chance to learn how other (...) (24 years ago, 25-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
