Subject:
|
Re: RCX & RIS, a fading glory?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Fri, 7 Feb 2003 02:05:12 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
659 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.robotics, Steve Baker <sjbaker1@airmail.net> writes:
> 1) If it's going to use existing wires - it's going to be **HUGE**
> just because of the need to have 18 2x2 stud connectors on it.
> 2) It's inflexible. If I just want four motors, I still have to
> haul this massive lump around. If I want two processors - I
> need two honking great lumps - even if I still need only two
> motors and one sensor.
> 3) It's *STILL* limiting and goes against the modularity that makes
> Lego mechanics so attractive.
Is it going to be honking huge? A 12 x 8 stud box can support the required
number of I/Os. Compare with the RCX.
I understand the modularity issue. I am guessing my ideal basic module is
just bigger than yours which economizes on CPUs, power conditioning and
comms device costs in big systems where larger quantities (4+) units need to
be combined.
> It's fun to plan how you'd do it - but ultimately, I doubt
> it'll ever happen.
Yes its fun to imagine, fantasize and plan and that's why we're here
chatting about it :)
But I tend to think my interest is less in the "blue sky, what if" area, and
more in the "hmm, we could make those" area.
Don't get me wrong though - keep those great ideas flowing ....
JB
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: RCX & RIS, a fading glory?
|
| (...) That's a good point...providing Lego carry on making them. It comes down to who makes this wonderous hypothetical system. * We'd hope that Lego would make it...then the motor design is a non-issue. * If not - then I suppose we'd need a 'legacy (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
17 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
