Subject:
|
RE: Mindstorms in 1999
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 11 Feb 1999 17:13:53 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Thomas, Jim <[Jim.Thomas@trw.]saynotospam[com]>
|
Viewed:
|
1387 times
|
| |
|
|
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Markus L. Noga [mailto:noga@inrialpes.fr]
> Sent: Thursday, February 11, 1999 3:46 AM
> To: LEGO Robotics list
> Subject: Re: Mindstorms in 1999
>
>
> Jim Thomas wrote:
> > I think it will be easier to get the new "blue" unit • targeted to different
> > languages because of the on screen programming paradigm and no host
> > computer/software required. I would be surprised if there • is a one year
> > delay for the new system to go into worldwide release after • an initial
> > limited rollout (if it is limited at all).
>
> I disagree. Internationalizing PC software is way easier than
> internationalizing embedded software with its inherent space
> constraints. To provide Suaheli software for RCX control is just to
> include another string table and set of documentation on the CD. If
> they're not providing PC communication, there'll be no easy firmware
> update process to accomodate suchlike changes, either.
Well I have to disagree with your disagreement. I have never done an
embedded application with textual language in it in the first place.
Therefore no internationalization needed. I was thinking the on screen
programming would be icon based not language based. I would be very
surprised if there were many words at all. I would be extremely surprised
if you had to enter characters.
> > > system's sales volume. If you think about it, the • Mindstorms costs them
> > > more to produce because of the serial transmitter, the PC • hosted software
> > > product support and development teams, and I bet more • parts than the new
> > > system. When you put the wholesale/retail prices into the • equation, Lego
> > > might only get $15-$30 more for Mindstorms (I don't know • the standard
> > > markup, but I have to imagine that wholesale is about
> 40-60% of retail).
>
> I disagree again. PC software is cheaper to develop and maintain than
> embedded software with its need for cross-development. There
> are more PC
> developers around, too. The serial port and carrier frequency
> generator
> are on-chip modules for the H8 and require few discrete components, so
> it's just a question of bundling the IR tower or making it an extra.
Well I'll have to disagree with your disagreement again. Not because of
disagreement with your assertion of development costs, but because both
systems have embedded software. Thus one system has two developments the
other one. Furthermore I guess that "blue" is essentially the same as the
RCX in both software and hardware. My guess is that the only major
difference is the packaging, display hardware and software, and the
programming input code. Another point to remember is that embedded code
has no recurring cost (well technically it does but you can't delete it)
while the PC SW does (although CDs are pretty cheap to make) and the IR
tower does cost something.
> Every second household in the US has a PC, as of this morning's Wired
> newsletter. Those that haven't won't buy a computer toy in
> any case. Why
> make a product more expensive by including a bigger display
> and keyboard
> if every likely customer already has a desktop system
> providing a better
> user interface?
I disagree. I think "blue" will not be perceived as a computer toy. It
will have no prerequisite computer ownership or operation requirements.
Lego has already said that it will be $50 *cheaper* than the RIS. Unless
they are pushing it as a loss leader I don't see how you assertion of
greater cost applies.
> LEGO has entered the computer product market very late, which in my
> opinion greatly contributed to the financial problems they're
> currently
> experiencing. Although Fischer-Technik and other toy brands
> had robotics
> systems available in 1993 and earlier, these didn't create half the
> hype. The Mindstorms did. In the US, they are LEGO's top product in
> terms of gross sales. For the first time ever, this made the US branch
> surpass the German one in sales.
>
> Why think about marketing? Even with completely mistargeted marketing,
> the unit practically sold by itself, surpassing projected sales by a
> factor of six. According to LEGO, they're currently firing marketing
> people to fix the balance sheet.
>
> Why discontinue this unit? There's just one reason. Well-informed
> sources recently hinted at a RCX 2.0 in development.
>
> Ciao, Markus.
>
> --
> Markus L. Noga noga@inrialpes.fr
> Check out legOS! http://www.multimania.com/legos/
> "He who quote merely employs his memory, not his reason." -Nietzsche
> --
> Did you check the web site first?: http://www.crynwr.com/lego-robotics
And the Mindstorms 2.0 will probably be positioned further away from the new
offerings. Most likely higher price, but we can always hope it will be
aimed at an older age group. On the other hand, how sure are we that the
new "blue" unit isn't the RCX 2.0 that was hinted at?
JT
--
Did you check the web site first?: http://www.crynwr.com/lego-robotics
|
|
1 Message in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
