 | | Re: The NXT step for HiTechnic?
|
|
(...) Nice idea, but two questions: How many GBC modules used an RCX? And how many of those RCXs had a free sensor port? Of course for next year's NXT-based GBC, with proper programming, a single BlueTooth cell-phone could turn off the 10% of the (...) (19 years ago, 5-Feb-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Using NXT in a name - legal?
|
|
(...) You could have XTJ for java and XTF for forth (although fortran also starts with f but somehow I doubt anyone is going to write a fortran compiler for the NXT :P ) (19 years ago, 5-Feb-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: The NXT step for HiTechnic?
|
|
(...) I have seen the compass module work on the RCX. Very cool!! Having the conversion wires announced (which I hadn't noticed before) relieves me. When I was out at the HT website looking at the NXT compass announcement, I went ahead and bought (...) (19 years ago, 5-Feb-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Using NXT in a name - legal?
|
|
Hi, I think as a name XT sounds cool. That gives XTOS for an operating systems and my favourite XTC for a C like programming language (you have to say it out loud a few times). Seems to work OK with Java and Fourth. Thomas (19 years ago, 5-Feb-06, to lugnet.robotics, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Using NXT in a name - legal?
|
|
(...) Hi, First I am not a lawyer. However I believe Steve Jobs of Apple computers still own the name and trademark of 'NeXT'. They (Apple) are even have gone after websites with domain names using 'ipod' and 'NeXT'. Just give you an idea for (...) (19 years ago, 5-Feb-06, to lugnet.robotics, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Using NXT in a name - legal?
|
|
(...) Heh, just reread Steve's reply and I think the answer is already hidden in there. Didn't spot it the first time. (19 years ago, 5-Feb-06, to lugnet.robotics, FTX)
|
| |
| | The NXT step for HiTechnic?
|
|
Browsing around the HiTechnic site I noticed this update: (URL) So the NXT digital interface is already showing some of its strengths it seems. I was always surprised that John could even get 3 degrees of accuracy out of that sensor, but with 1 (...) (19 years ago, 4-Feb-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: What I would do (2)
|
|
(...) I'd say: Go for the NXT thing! Give us a language that utilizes the NXT as much as possible. As the NXT is both faster and has more memory than RCX (not to mention the CyberMaster, which is all I have for the moment) it doesn't seem (...) (20 years ago, 1-Feb-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: RC DrWho K9
|
|
You might want to check out: (URL) (20 years ago, 2-Feb-06, to lugnet.space, lugnet.robotics, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Tester
|
|
My last 2 posts here have fallen by the wayside somewhere. This is a test message to see if it gets through. Sorry if you thought it was about some sort of new program debugger software or maybe a design for a robotic teacher. Thomas (20 years ago, 2-Feb-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: RC DrWho K9
|
|
Very nice!!! Russell _so_ has to work this into Series 3 somewhere. ;) (20 years ago, 2-Feb-06, to lugnet.space, lugnet.robotics, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | RC DrWho K9
|
|
Hi I've been building some DrWho lego .......I'm still working on all my DrWho MOCs Dalek, Davros, Cyberman and K9 but some friendly AFOLs have said I should RC my Dalek or K9 so I picked up a cheap "Dirt Crusher RC" set as the base of my go at an (...) (20 years ago, 2-Feb-06, to lugnet.space, lugnet.robotics, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: What I would do (2)
|
|
(...) Performance should come first. But thinking about API compatability, hopefully we will get a more programmable environment than the RCX's limitation from registers, functions and memory. A slowdown process may also be needed to make the NXT (...) (20 years ago, 1-Feb-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | So when do we know about the MDP?
|
|
It ends Sunday, will participants receive emails on Monday? I would assume so since they want to deliver the kits by the end of February. -aps (20 years ago, 1-Feb-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: studless construction practice
|
|
(...) Wait until you try to take the dang things apart ;-). For studless disassembly, I find a thin sheet of textured rubber invaluable for gripping the pins to pull them out (commonly used for opening stubborn jar lids). This does point out one (...) (20 years ago, 1-Feb-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: studless construction practice
|
|
I've recently got back into technics.. and got a few of the 2004/05 kits... my first impression was: "This is Peg-o... not Lego!" after my first 4 hour session of building the 8436 truck.. my fingers were really sore from inserting so many little (...) (20 years ago, 20-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: What I would do (2)
|
|
(...) Absolutely. I think the design of the NXT NQC should be dependent on the standard firmware just as NQC was based on the RCX firmware. David nailed exactly what I'm interested in. Even when using NQC it still **feels** like I'm writing in C. It (...) (20 years ago, 1-Feb-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: What I would do (2)
|
|
(...) Definitely performance! Trying to porting an old RCX program to the NXT would be near impossible -- everything is so different there. Just as you'd have to totally rebuild your robot, you have to do a total rewrite of your code anyway. So (...) (20 years ago, 1-Feb-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: How many people signed up for the NXT Developer's Program?
|
|
(...) Following Bert van Dam: (URL) would investigate a self-learning robot with NXT via a wireless connection to my computer as a father-son project. (20 years ago, 1-Feb-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: What I would do (2)
|
|
(...) Oh, performance! NXT NQC should match the NXT brick's capabilities. How many people have such sophisticated programs that they need to port from the RCX to the NXT to realisically demand compatibility? I mean this a robot hobby tool. Half the (...) (20 years ago, 31-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
