Subject:
|
Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 22:41:54 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3527 times
|
| |
|
|
Kevin L. Clague wrote:
>
> 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
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 to have "miss the boat" on a ~few~ features.
With that said, the caveat is that you can't please everyone, and I’m
sure a percentage of "us" will never get everything we want.
CV: I am not a hardware designer, and some would say, I can’t code my
way out of a paper bag.
My HUMBLE gut reaction opinion.
I would have to believe that their are a wealth of off the shelf chips
that might have been better suited to "presumably" meet both the needs
of Lego and cost, AND still get closer to what AFOLs want. Maybe that
means slower clock speed, but higher memory?
We can not forget that the counter to your addition cost in R/D and
research argument is that this is a new device from the ground up. No
one should be saying Lego needs to redesign now; but from a wishful
thinking point of view, it would have been nice if, from day one, more
memory, or X Y and Z were implemented.
No one here was in on that discussion except 4 guys. And they can’t
talk. THAT is part of the feuding I see.
I do not have the skill set to quest for chips that would have been
better than these: (presuming these are the chips in question)
AT91SAM7S
STR712FR2
Maybe someone who is better versed on, off the shelf chips could do it
as a point of interest. (Or maybe since the NXT has been announced
Soren Lund could post here and save people the grief and say which chip
it is.
Imagine if more if the spec was published. How many hackers here could
start with a software "hack" based on chip info? Is this naive of me?
Maybe. (See my above CV)
OK.... I'm rambling now.
I have a Lego robot dinner to attend
thanks
Chris
Just some guy
|
|
Message has 5 Replies:
 | | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
| (...) Well, let me make my position clear. I want more memory too, and I understand Danny and Steve B. want for more memory too. But you can't get somethin for nuttin'. My initial reaction was "64K !?!? You mean M right? DRAM is cheap!". But LEGO (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
| (...) I can to. But, I don't think I can force a redesign (to put it mildly). So... how do we fix this problem? I mean, the idea of "only three sensors" didn't last long with the RCX (I generally shun custom hardware, yet regularly use 4 or more (...) (19 years ago, 14-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
| (...) Chris, I don't believe I've ever taken the stance that I don't want more memory in the NXT. I can't imagine that I'd ever take that position. I'm not opposed to more memory, but I am trying to see, understand and share what little I know about (...) (19 years ago, 14-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
| (...) I imagine (and am hoping) at least one such "hacker" will be included in the developer program recently announced, and hopefully enough info will be made available to get a good start on said software. But even if that doesn't happen, remember (...) (19 years ago, 14-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
| Hi Chris, (...) I'd guess at the AT91SAM7S256, the ST type has a lot of stuff that isn't needed (CAN, smartcard interface, HDLC interface) and 16K extra flash which aren't mentioned in the LEGO press release. See (URL) and (URL) Also take a look at (...) (19 years ago, 15-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
| (...) 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 (...) (19 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
|
|
|
|
