Subject:
|
Re: LEGO Purism
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 8 Aug 2002 19:53:58 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1444 times
|
| |
|
|
If you were a Lego purist, you'd be using the programming software which was
supplied in the RIS kits.
"The Gaff" <lego-robotics@crynwr.com> wrote in message
news:OE50nHAaaz7EjQxzmWe000001c4@hotmail.com...
> > Why is everything Lego makes "pure"?
>
> Because my chosen hobby is *LEGO* robotics, a distinct subset of robotics • as
> a whole. I am fully aware of the advantages of "opening my mind" to using
> non-LEGO elements; I just don't want to. I understand that you feel
> differently, but that doesn't make me wrong.
>
> In my sick and twisted mind, it is desirable to work within the • constraints
> of a known system. There is a very finite amount of Mindstorms and Technic
> stuff that LEGO makes, and it is within my ability to keep up with it all.
> When LEGO introduces a new sensor, actuator, or Technic element, I can • find
> out, buy some, and incorporate them into my designs right away. I can • build
> with confidence that I have at my disposal the full spectrum of parts
> available and make the best choices for my project. This lets me build
> happily without obsessing about better ways to do it.
>
> If I accepted non-LEGO solutions, I would never be satisfied with my
> creations. I would know that there were infinite potential solutions to my
> problems, and I would never get anything done because I would spend all of
> my time trying to suss out the "perfect" solution. It would bother me
> horribly to know that there was better hardware available than what I was
> using - and there always would be. Serious robotics is a very, very
> expensive hobby. (I am experiencing these exact problems with my car MP3
> player project at present, by the way.)
>
> I know - I have personality problems... but that's another topic.
>
> > Why not embrace anything and everything which might move the state of • the
> > art forward?
>
> Because I cannot afford it. If I was going to play with non-LEGO robotics,
> there would be accelerometers, gyros, laser ranging, high-speed RF
> communication, stereoscopic image processing, shape memory alloys, stepper
> motors, servos, solenoids... to say nothing of all the tools I'd need to
> machine parts and make them work nicely together. LEGO is plenty expensive
> enough on its own.
>
> Issac.
>
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: LEGO Purism
|
| This purism thing (which I happen to agree with BTW) is a hard thing to pin down. I think of it like this. I like building things with Lego - I *know* that I could do things more easily by machining it from solid metal or casting something or (...) (22 years ago, 9-Aug-02, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | RE: LEGO Purism
|
| (...) This one is interesting. By using the firmware in the brick in a new and interesting way, are we exploiting the power of LEGO? Or are we filing the studs off a 2x4 to make a tile brick? It all depends on your point of view. I see the RCX as a (...) (22 years ago, 9-Aug-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: LEGO Purism
|
| (...) Because my chosen hobby is *LEGO* robotics, a distinct subset of robotics as a whole. I am fully aware of the advantages of "opening my mind" to using non-LEGO elements; I just don't want to. I understand that you feel differently, but that (...) (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
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
