Subject:
|
Re: FLL not allowing NQC; Mindscript is allowed
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 10 Mar 2005 00:01:25 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3104 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.robotics, Mark Tarrabain wrote:
> If one allows things that are not produced or distributed by lego, then
> why can't one use non-official sensors? Why can't one drop the entire
> default firmware? Heck, why does a person even have to use the RCX in
> the first place and not a more robust microcontroller?
I don't follow your logic. Are you saying that any change to the rules to allow
non-LEGO programming environments that target the standard LEGO firmware
(including ones that they encourage people to use by selling tutorials for them
on their web site) would require further rule changes to allow non-standard
firmwares, non-RCX microcontrollers, and non-LEGO sensors?
It isn't a slippery slope. The FLL rules currently allow for non-LEGO computers
running non-LEGO operating systems. They don't care that my P4 with a gig of
ram runs Robolab or RIS ten times faster than that team from the inner city with
a hand-me-down PII with 32mb. My team is far more productive at programming
because while we've tweaked our logic twice and downloaded the changes to the
RCX they're still watching the hour glass spin. If FLL really wants to worry
about unfair programmer productivity advantages they should worry more about PC
hardware specs than about using NQC vs Robolab or RIS.
Allowing any programming tool that targets the standard LEGO firmware running on
standard LEGO hardware (i.e., the RCX) does not open a can of worms. The LEGO
hardware and firmware are what keep the playing field level. Why care what tool
is used to produce the standard LEGO byte codes, especially when that tool is
free and available on additional platforms? The only reason I can think of is
that they want to make money off the sale of RIS and Robolab.
John Hansen
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: FLL not allowing NQC; Mindscript is allowed
|
| If one allows things that are not produced or distributed by lego, then why can't one use non-official sensors? Why can't one drop the entire default firmware? Heck, why does a person even have to use the RCX in the first place and not a more robust (...) (20 years ago, 9-Mar-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
114 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
