 | | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
|
(...) You are right when you say the link is Bluetooth. With the RCX the link was IR signals. As long as there is some communication protocol (the more standard, the better) extremely complex logic can get into a robot's behavior. With the RCX I was (...) (20 years ago, 13-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
|
good analysis. Also keep in mind that Lego sells primarily through retail resellers, so their take is considerably less than the SRP. (Even the Lego stores have huge overhead, being in expensive malls). To sell a product like this at < $250 and make (...) (20 years ago, 13-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
|
What would I like to implement that won't fit in 256K... check out this list of modules from Pyro: # PyroModuleDirectControl # PyroModuleSequencingControl # PyroModuleBehaviorBasedControl # PyroModuleReinforcementLearning # PyroModuleNeuralNetworks (...) (20 years ago, 13-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
|
(...) (speaking out from the peanut gallery) I had a big message going about this, but ROSCO has save me the time to type it. Ditto on all the above. LEGO had a price point they wouldn't budge from. According to the Wired article, more than one of (...) (20 years ago, 13-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
|
(...) Now this is funny. Are you suggesting (A) JB doesn't know much about hardware or (B) JB doesn't know about LEGO's development process? If you select (A) or (B), you should rethink your answer. On Fri, January 13, 2006 1:23 pm, steve wrote: (...) (20 years ago, 13-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
|
(...) Dan, Once you get your hands on an NXT I encourage you to try. Sounds like you have considered the costs and it might work. Don't wait for permission from us! Just try it. Often when people say it can't be done, I just consider it a challenge. (...) (20 years ago, 13-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
|
(...) Code, may be. But I can easily imagine large data usage in many applications. Example 1: Robot that can play pre-recorded messages. "Danger, Will Robinson!". A robot that can talks base on what it encounters is both fun and help debugging. (...) (20 years ago, 13-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
|
(...) Steve, Would you say that the above paragraph is a well thought out, coherent argument? Have you ever actually read a post by John or myself where we claim that LEGO can do no wrong? Or are you simply supposing that because we disagree with (...) (20 years ago, 13-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
|
What you say below is entirely true, up to a point. Note that most Lego stuff (and this is true outside Lego -- it applies to most controller code I've seen for robotics) is now using bytecode interpreters. The memory advantages far outweigh the CPU (...) (20 years ago, 13-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
|
(...) Steve, no matter how you look at it, adding that greater potential would have increased the price. Not just the $10 or whateva for the memory, but the extra development time needed to integrate it. Hell they could have just included a (...) (20 years ago, 13-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
