Subject:
|
Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 20:51:32 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3031 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.robotics, steve <sjbaker1@airmail.net> wrote:
> Kevin L. Clague wrote:
>
> > What you need to do is to make a dongle for your laptop PC
> > with 8G DRAM, a 1 terabyte hard disk, that gives you an infinite
> > number of LEGO NXT compatible motor ports and sensor ports.
> >
> > You will probably have to drill a few technic pin holes in the case,
> > and maybe glue a few plates on here or there, but from there you can
> > build a robot that has the capabilities you desire.
>
> John Barnes wrote:
>
> > Agreed! And if they did come up with a PC in a brick, you'd have to put new
> > batteries in it every few minutes :)
>
> Oh *please*. These are a pair of unjustified responses - you
> guys both know better.
>
> 1) Flash memory doesn't consume power until you read or write it.
> Notice how a thumb drive retains data indefinitely without a
> battery, how my camera stores two gigabytes of photo's and runs
> on one AA and how my son's MP3 player keeps 128MB of music and
> plays for days on one AAA. Doing what I believe they should have
> done eats no significant extra power consumption.
>
> 2) No, of course you can't cram a PC into a NXT - but you most
> definitely COULD have crammed in a teeny-tiny $5 flash chip into
> the case and given the existing device a VASTLY greater potential.
>
> OK, OK - so this group is populated in part by a bunch of Lego fanatics
> who believe their favored company can do no wrong - and you don't want
> to hear *ANY* criticism whatever of the shiney new toy - fair enough -
> add me to your spam filter and you'll never see one of my posts again.
Steve,
Would you say that the above paragraph is a well thought out, coherent argument?
Have you ever actually read a post by John or myself where we claim that LEGO
can do no wrong? Or are you simply supposing that because we disagree with you?
Seems like the above paragraph is more of an emotional reaction than a well
posed argument, but I didn't intend to start an argument and we can stop this
one now.
>
> But if you want to slam me down, at least have the courtesy to do so
> with sensible, well thought out and coherent arguments...which
> is all I've *ever* posted here myself.
>
> <sigh>
My humble apologies if I truly offended. Did you notice the smiley in my
post? It was meant to be humerous. I guess humor is a dangerous thing in
print. Sorry I'm not experienced at writing satire.
I believe that LEGO can do wrong, and has proven it in many ways, including by
not being profitable years in a row. I personally think their shift to studless
is not motivated because it is a tremendously huge advance in building, but
because it gets them economic protection through patents. I think that is wrong
too. Do you need to hear more?
I don't that you've made any arguments for your teeny-tiny $5 flash chip that
are coherent or well thought out from an economic profit/loss perspective. This
perspective *is* none the less LEGO's highest priority. I don't think you've
actually studied the cost of your teeny-tiny flash at all. Have you looked at
what you are asking for from a technical perspective as other have done? I
don't think you've made reasonable or coherent arguments, otherwise I wouldn't
have been motivated to write my satrical (sp?) note.
The teeny-tiny $5 flash delivers data one bit at a time. So if you want to
wait for 32 of those bits to come out *before* you execute a 32 bit ARM7
instruction, then you have more patience than I. Now to get 32 bits out at a
time, you'de need 32 of those teeny tiny $5 flash chips to avoid waiting so
much. 32 * $5 = $160. Still worthwhile? I guess I don't think you've looked
at this from a technical perspective either.
I'm sure that LEGO has scrutinzed and wrestled with cost issues much smaller
than $5 per manufactured NXT. $5 is a big number when talking about small
volumes of a $250 set.
That said, you can go ahead with your continued "coherent and resonable
areguments about your teeny-tiny $5 flash" without any more feedback from me.
Have a nice day,
Kev
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
| (...) Kevin, While I agree with your points regarding cost/features; and I can understand the view of the "need more memory" crowd. I think what needs to be expressed more "eloquently" is the fact that while starting from the ground up, Lego seemed (...) (18 years ago, 13-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
| Kevin L. Clague wrote: > What you need to do is to make a dongle for your laptop PC > with 8G DRAM, a 1 terabyte hard disk, that gives you an infinite > number of LEGO NXT compatible motor ports and sensor ports. > > You will probably have to drill (...) (18 years ago, 13-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
52 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
|
|
|
|
