Subject:
|
Re: Intimidated by LEGO Minstorms -- was: Service pack 5111 - Wires - no longer available
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Wed, 11 Sep 2002 04:47:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1919 times
|
| |
|
|
> 1.being one of the most expensive lego sets there is, parents are very
> concerned about what their $$$ is buying. There just isnt enough info out
> there (by "out there", I mean in the places where the RIS is sold, either
> on the box or even better as some kind of leaflet that potential RIS owners
> could pick up and take home to read) regarding the capabilities of the RIS
> as well as different robobts you can build with it. In particuar, there
> isnt enough info out there on just how powerfull the RCX brick is. Just
> looking at a RCX brick, it doesnt look like there is much you can do with it...
agreed
>
> 2.the sorting issue, I dont really see any decent solution to this, I doubt
> lego would offer "pre-sorted" sets. Perhaps they could e.g. put all the
> gears in one bag, all the beams in another and so on or something.
Personally, I think that anyone who's attention span is so short that
they can't spend the time to sort them into sandwich bags if they
absolutely have to (and only do it once) probably doesn't have the
attention span to actually build a half-decent robot and learn from
the experience. These people probably shouldn't have an RIS in the
first place. Sorting my RIS's took less than an hour. I can't count
how long my entry(s) for RTL10
(http://peach.mie.utoronto.ca/events/lego/lego-022302-index.html) took
to build. If an hour is too intimidating, god help them if they try to
actually do something complicated.
>
> 3.the 2.0 on its own is a great set but its hard to get more parts, there
> is the ultimate accessory set and ultimate builders set but neither have
> the kind of parts most usefull for making decent robots...
generally true
> I think the UAS would be good if you took out the remote control (and mabie
> some of the throwbot legs etc), I wouldnt mind one for the rotation sensor,
WHAT???!!! Are you nuts? (said respectfully) The remote control should
be considered *mandatory*. In fact I'm of the opinion that it should
have been included in the RIS in the first place. Even if you build
only "safe" robots, the remote is essential for starting a robot where
your fingers might interfere with the mechanism or where shaking the
robot is undesirable. It also gives you the freedom to mount the RCX
in a position where the front panel isn't necessarily accessible. This
is often the case for robots that require a low center of gravity. If
you start building "unsafe" robots (robots that might commit suicide
if you can't get to them fast enough) the remote is a life (and RCX)
saver. Development for RTL9
(http://peach.mie.utoronto.ca/events/lego/lego-101301-index.html) and
RTL11 http://peach.mie.utoronto.ca/events/lego/lego-081702-index.html
would have meant carnage without one.
Then there's the whole issue of resetting mechanisms. Most of the
robots for RTL11, including mine, had to start in a retracted state.
At the end of each run, the robot would have expanded itself, deployed
a bridge, stretched an arm, whatever. This would have to be reset
before the next competition. Yes, this could be done in software, but
why bother?
> lamp etc but with the remote controll its too expensive.
Only if you're buying more than one set.
> The UBS is a little bit better but it still has some useless parts in it.
> Also, the parts in the 2.0 and both accessory sets are just in the wrong
> colors, if they were more uniform (none of these transparent angle beams
> thanks) it would make it easier to build with. For example, in the RIS 2.0,
> start by making the green, yellow and blue plates grey. Then make the
> 2-bend angle beams black. Etc.
Hmmm. Well, I suppose everyone's entitled to their opinion. I think
most people build for function first, not aesthetics. Besides, quite
frankly I think a little splash of colour is generally an improvement
for most designs, unless you're trying to colour-coordinate something
which anyone who's seen me dressed and in person would know is a
foreign concept to me.
>
> 4.not enough ideas. I own a 2.0 plus a bunch of other technic and I still
> havent thought of many good ideas for what to do with it. They just dont
> give you enough different ideas in the box IMHO.
Why do so many people seem lost unless someone tells them what to do?
Back in the late 60's and 70's there weren't many alternate models
shown either. Yes, I loved the idea books from back then. Yes, I built
a few models based on some the those pictures. However then, as now,
99% of what I make comes from my own imagination. Has imagination
become an endangered species? If I want one of my old trains
(122,3,4,5) to have a coaling station, I just build one. I don't need
someone to show me a picture that I can go by. I just do it. Does it
look like a work of art? Well, generally, no, but that's only because
I haven't go an aesthetic bone in my body. Most of my building is goal
based. I decide I want a type of building, or want to solve a
particular problem (today it was a multi-RCX pinball machine using
soccer balls) I just let my imagination run wild. Don't be afraid to
try it.
Matthias Jetleb
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
6 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
|
|
|
|
