Subject:
|
Re: Something else is needed, I think...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Tue, 4 May 1999 00:41:36 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Nick Taylor <ntaylor@iname.com>
|
Viewed:
|
930 times
|
| |
|
|
Mark Tarrabain:
Dave Baum:
John A. Tamplin:
Kekoa Proudfoot:
Ralph Hempel:
Luis Villa:
et al:
In the late '60s I had a '57 VW Bug ... absolutely loved it!
But, it didn't go fast enough. So I replaced the engine with
a 1500 cc. model. It went faster, but not fast enough. So I
replaced the cylinders with huge ones, was up to around 2000 cc.
But now it wouldn't get enough fuel so I put a two barrel carb
on it ... better, but not fast enough. Pulled the heads and
polished and ported ... same story. After many months, about
$2000 and 3 or 4 hundred man hours later, I had a really fast
VW, but it didn't corner very well. Went through a similar
exercise with the suspension and wheels ... a lot better, but
still not as solid as I wanted. Then one day the light came
on ... my Bug was just a *TOY* ... and *NO* amount of money
or tuning and tweaking would make it as fast as most stock
American cars. There was no practical method of overcoming
the VW's inherent limitations.
I kept the VW because it was a fun toy, and bought a Porsche
that would go really *FAST*. (Same cycle started over again)
It would be nice if the RCX had 18 inputs and 12 outputs. It
would be nice if it could be programmed in C without the limits
that result from the LEGO firmware ... and even nicer if you
could drop into assembler when needed. But it is just like
my '57 Bug ... just a toy.
If you want a more powerful toy that's great ... but maybe a
68HC11 on a HandyBoard would give the opportunity to "go
faster" and still leave the RCX to play with. Think about
your goals before getting in too deeply!
- - - Nick - - -
BTW, my kids and I use NQC & RCX-CC on a regular basis. Thanks
to Dave and Mark!
- N -
--
Did you check the web site first?: http://www.crynwr.com/lego-robotics
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | RE: Something else is needed, I think...
|
| Nick wrote: (using embedded HTML!!!!) (...) Right you are, Nick. I'm the guy that kept discouraging do-it-yourself "general" solutions just before the RCX came out. Then I wrote pbFORTH ..... I've never even cracked the wrapper on my LEGO Mindstorms (...) (25 years ago, 4-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Something else is needed, I think...
|
| I'm just wondering how many people agree with me on this point... I think that another code development system is needed for the RCX. Why? Well, it seems like everything that's already out there is either overkill (legos, pbforth for rcx), or (...) (25 years ago, 2-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
67 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
|
|
|
|
