 | | Re: Lego Technic: R.I.P. ?
|
|
(...) for (...) I think that's because many of the people who got excited about Mindstorms share my total disinterest in Spybotics. I wanted more sensors, more actuators, and more support parts (planetary gears, etc) for my Mindstorms robotics... (...) (22 years ago, 14-Nov-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | RE: Lego Technic: R.I.P. ?
|
|
(...) Only if the lesson learned was: "hmmm... ok, let's see what happens if we put a few more basic sensors, another motor, some leds, some more memory and maybe a PC link... just in case someone might want to actually program these little things." (...) (22 years ago, 14-Nov-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Technic: R.I.P. ?
|
|
(...) I think we all agree on that point - a more modular computer with as few limits on expandability as the technology can manage. RCX is OK - but you immediately run into three problems: 1) Not enough motor and sensor ports. No matter how many (...) (22 years ago, 14-Nov-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Technic: R.I.P. ?
|
|
I recall that construction toys (like Meccano or Lego et al.) of some years ago were not based around specific models as they are today, but based around a certain collection of parts. Books were provided to encourage a certain level of initial (...) (22 years ago, 14-Nov-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | RE: Lego Technic: R.I.P. ?
|
|
(...) Yep. (...) Yep. At least, separate the CPU power supply from the motor output power supply. We already have those power supply boxes: the 6xAA or 1x9V batt box :) (...) Yep again :) IR's ok for local, short range comms... but radio is a must. (...) (22 years ago, 14-Nov-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Technic: R.I.P. ?
|
|
(...) Yes - I always remember looking at the 'Number 1' Meccano set (AKA 'Erector set') that came in a massive wooden trunk with layers and layers of felt-lined trays to hold the parts. It was more like a piece of Victorian furniture than a kids (...) (22 years ago, 14-Nov-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Modular advanced RCX - yes, it's called JCX
|
|
(...) Well, that's the idea behind JCX ((URL) which has now been in beta test for over a year. We are nearing the final stretch and hope to release early 2003. A student class at the University of Utah is using them, here's a link to the team page: (...) (22 years ago, 14-Nov-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Technic: R.I.P. ?
|
|
(...) Not to nitpick, but remember that Meccano and Erector were two distinct and different companies. The latter being somewhat of a clone of the first. That said, and in the context of this thread, there are a number of lessons the LEGO company (...) (22 years ago, 15-Nov-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Technic: R.I.P. ?
|
|
(...) Really?! I always thought the Meccano company made both sets - simply *calling* them 'Erector' in the USA and 'Meccano' in the UK. I have both Meccano (carefully saved since I was a kid) - and Erector sets purchased in the USA several years (...) (22 years ago, 15-Nov-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Technic: R.I.P. ?
|
|
(...) Meccano was started in England by Hornsby... Erector followed years later in the U.S. For many years they were each other's competition. (...) If you look at the bottom of that 3-year-old posting I mentioned, you'll note that the eventual (...) (22 years ago, 15-Nov-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
