Subject:
|
Re: Spybotics vs Cricket
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 8 Aug 2002 02:27:36 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1338 times
|
| |
|
|
Steve,
If I look at from your angle I think you are quite right. Your comment
really applies to the whole Lego line of products. The original concept of
lego was to have a set of bricks and use your imagination to construct
something from them. Today the market seems to demand pre-configured items
tied to popular themes seen in the movies and on television. Depressing! At
the same time I look at the impressive RCX work done in Luxemburg at the
School Convict Episcopal de Luxembourg and think wow there is hope yet!
In lugnet.robotics, sjbaker1@airmail.net writes:
> Colin White wrote:
>
> > I am somewhat puzzled by the attitude of many people to the Spybots. I think
> > we must accept that Lego is losing money and that its main audience is
> > children. It must therefore devote its efforts to its main customer base,
> > i.e., children.
>
> I think most people understand *why* Lego are heading this way.
>
> That doesn't mean we have to like it though.
>
> > Also, developing software and hardware for Robotics is
> > expensive and it is very difficult for a company like Lego to deliver
> > products at a cost-effective price. Having said that I have used most of the
> > Lego Robot-related products including the Code Pilot, RDS Scout, RCX, DDK
> > Micro Scout, Cybermaster, and now the Spybots.
>
> If development costs are the issue then they'd be well advised to come up
> with ONE truly modular computing solution and use it everywhere rather
> than repeatedly redesigning *everything*.
>
> I'm fairly sure your first explanation is the right one. They obviously
> think their target demographic wants something less sophisticate and
> more plug-and-play...and (regrettably) they are probably right about that.
>
> It takes a very dedicated parent to help a kid learn to program an RCX - and
> the Scout really isn't 'cool' enough for kids in this day and age.
>
> However, for all that I understand why they did it - I don't have to be
> happy about it - and I'm not.
>
> Lego computers should be every bit as modular as Lego mechanical parts.
>
> I *desperately* wanted to see a 2x4 brick with a CPU in it, another with
> a RAM chip, another with a basic OS ROM, another with a sound synthesiser,
> another with an IR comms port - all connected together with a simple plug-and-socket
> that would carry some kind of universal data bus and the power to run everything
> from a separate battery box. I think this is very do-able with an I2C bus.
>
> Then your motors and sensors would each contain enough minimal electronics
> to take set-speed/direction or read-sensor commands from their I2C bus.
>
> You could have LCD panels, buttons, etc as other bricks with the same interface.
>
> This would allow you to have an essentially unlimited number of motors and
> sensors, multiple CPU's, multiple IR ports, RAM expansion, etc, etc.
>
> If they'd done that then Spybotics would have simply been a standard set
> of computer bricks - plus a special ROM brick that would do all the 'Spy' stuff.
> Those people who grow out of the Spy stuff could simply toss the ROM brick
> into a parts drawer and plug in an RCX-like ROM from another set and all of
> their collection of motors, sensors, CPU's and RAM would still be useful.
> This is not unlike buying a StarWars set, playing with it at such for a while
> - but then tossing the JarJar Binks minifig and recycling all the other parts
> to make...whatever *YOUR* imagination wants.
>
> That's the true spirit that made Lego what it is - they've just temporarily
> forgotten that.
>
> ----------------------------- Steve Baker -------------------------------
> Mail : <sjbaker1@airmail.net> WorkMail: <sjbaker@link.com>
> URLs : http://www.sjbaker.org
> http://plib.sf.net http://tuxaqfh.sf.net http://tuxkart.sf.net
> http://prettypoly.sf.net http://freeglut.sf.net
> http://toobular.sf.net http://lodestone.sf.net
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Spybotics vs Cricket
|
| (...) I think most people understand *why* Lego are heading this way. That doesn't mean we have to like it though. (...) If development costs are the issue then they'd be well advised to come up with ONE truly modular computing solution and use it (...) (22 years ago, 8-Aug-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
39 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
