 | | Re: Why Java for Robots (was NXT and bluetooth enabled phones)
|
|
Bruce (...) Ermm. How much does a NXT have? No doubt you think that everyone should buy one of your systems but far more NXTs will be sold. Lookng at the posts on other robotics newsgroups, I reckon that over 90% of home-made robots do not have (...) (19 years ago, 19-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Why Java for Robots (was NXT and bluetooth enabled phones)
|
|
(...) Why do you say that? I thought we were discussing Java on robotics. You said Java for small robots was not practical. I presented our system as but one implementation which works. (...) That's the total *available* memory. The JVM is in (...) (19 years ago, 19-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Why Java for Robots (university vs hobbyists)
|
|
(...) Maybe we are at cross purposes here. You may be right, that for many hobbyists, Java is too advanced and complex, and since their needs are simpler, C is more than enough. Ease of use and low cost is probably more important than computing (...) (19 years ago, 19-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
