Subject:
|
Re: RIS version 1.5 coming this fall
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 29 Jul 1999 05:26:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
977 times
|
| |
|
|
On Fri, 2 Jul 1999, in lugnet.robotics, Dave Baum wrote:
> Technically, RIS is the "entire" set, meaning the RCX, the software, and
> all 700+ lego pieces (plus manual, box, etc.). I doubt that there are
> version 1.5 lego pieces about to be released, so clearly they could
> release version 1.5 of RIS without updating every element contained
> within it.
>
> Updating the software is reasonably simple from a logistics standpoint.
> They don't have to worry too much about stale inventory because they can
> always make version 1.5 software available for download (or perhaps for a
> nominal shipping fee if you bought Mindstorms after a certain date, etc).
> They can also keep existing customers happy by offering upgrades (download
> or new CD). Both are quite inexpensive to implement.
You know, I think I'm starting to get nervous about this 1.5 business.
Let's say they do happen to ship a 1.0->1.5 software compatability upgrade.
The first question that comes to my mind is: Is the upgrade reversible or
irreversible? Any why or why not? What's going on behind the scenes here?
Maybe I'm just paranoid, but here is an anecdote: At my last job, I worked
for a company which manufactured dedicated print servers on a proprietary
hardware. Some of the software upgrade paths were strictly one-way: once
you installed Software Release 7.4, there was no way ever for you to go back
to Software Release 7.3. This was in part simply a software architecture
decision, as it made the installation and setup software much less complex;
but it had an important strategic side-effect: it was a way to crack down
on third-party exploitation of loopholes, bugs, or intellectual property
theft. For example, one employee who left the company actually stole a
valuable piece of firmware and took this to a competitor who illegally used
the information. The theft was eventually proven in court, and I believe
a preliminary injuction stopped the competitor's illegal sales after a few
months, but of course the courtroom isn't the only way to fight such a
battle. Long before the case was ever decided, the "secret formula" in the
firmware was changed and sent out with new software. The idea is that you
fight a battle like that on two fronts simultaneously -- both in the
courtroom and in the product itself via upgrades -- in case one or the
other fails.
I'm sure there must be thousands of similar stories; it goes with territory
when you're selling proprietary hardware/software combinations.
> Updating the hardware (RCX) is another matter. As soon as they introduce
> an RCX 1.5, the existing inventory becomes very hard to move. Upgrades
> would be pricey (either for the consumer or absorbed by TLG). Either way
> they are creating a big problem for themselves. If upgraded hardware were
> necessary from a competitive standpoint, then you do it (computer
> companies are doing it all the time), but I personally don't think TLG has
> any competition in the RCX space right now. Their next products appear to
> be creating a lower tier (Scout, etc), not trying to evolve higher.
This is what's making me nervous too. The trend toward dumbing-down the
robotics offerings -- more toward kids and less toward adults. Hey, if
that's their chosen target market and they need to do that, then more power
to 'em -- that's great for kids! (But I worry where it leaves us adults.)
> Internally, the RCX may have already gone through several updates. This
> is pretty common as designs are refined and cost-reduced. These types of
> updates are typically unannounced and not even evident from the outside of
> the product.
What do you suppose the chances are that TLG will alter the firmware
slightly in the RCX 1.5 so that the firmware can no longer be altered, or
so that it can only be altered by official TLG software?
Can that be done -- technically?
Perhaps not 100% literally, but suppose that in order to download new
firmware to RCX 1.5, the host software communicating to the RCX via IR had
to supply a lengthy password. That would certainly be very easy for TLG
to implement, yes?
But then what? Well, then if anyone tries to ship a third-party add-on to
download new replacement firmware, they're now committing an alleged act of
copyright infringement because they've shipped a copy of this proprietary
copyrighted password/encryption bitstring.
So this is totally my own speculation and fear -- and take it with a grain
of salt -- but I fear that the RCX 1.5 may not represent sunshine and
lollipops for the open-source software movement here on the net, but rather
a step backwards towards a more closed system. Again, I *really* really
hope I'm wrong and just being paranoid, but it would certainly be consistent
with something that a hardware company would think of doing.
(At this point, I'm almost tempted to start saving up for a few dozen RCX
1.0's in case this scenario comes true.)
> We won't know for certain until TLG actually releases 1.5, but personally
> I'd expect it to be a software update, not hardware.
Given what was said in the August 9 Forbes article, I kinda would almost be
surprised now if 1.5 didn't include both new software and a slight new twist
on the hardware: a proprietary encryption/password chip or sequencer which
would allow TLG considerably more leeway in the courtroom if they ever felt
that replacement firmware was truly getting under their skin.
I don't know what it would actually take before things really get under
their skin, but note that the recent Forbes article mentioned that TLG
executives had "thought about" suing (presumably with regard to the reverse-
engineering efforts last year). Now I think they're savvy enough to know
that they wouldn't have stood any chance in court with such a lawsuit,
since reverse-engineering is legal in the U.S., but the mere fact that they
even thought about suing, or wanted to mentioned it publicly for whatever
reason, tells us that at least some of the people high up at TLG are, how
shall we say, "nervous" about third-party add-ons. And that doesn't give
me a warm fuzzy feeling.
Am I just over-reacting?
> Of course I'd still like to see version 1.5 gears :)
More worm gears!!
--Todd
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: RIS version 1.5 coming this fall
|
| (...) It has to be reversible from the RCX brick's point of view, since there is no hardware on the RCX to forcibly reprogram its ROM. Perhaps on the PC side it is not reversible, but there is always the uninstall new, reinstall old process, which I (...) (25 years ago, 29-Jul-99, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | Re: RIS version 1.5 coming this fall
|
| (...) [snip] (...) I truly doubt that LEGO in going to create a new OCX. Their strategy was always focused in creating the maximum sowtware with the less work possible. The OCX compatibility between two very different devices like the RCX and (...) (25 years ago, 29-Jul-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: RIS version 1.5 coming this fall
|
| Technically, RIS is the "entire" set, meaning the RCX, the software, and all 700+ lego pieces (plus manual, box, etc.). I doubt that there are version 1.5 lego pieces about to be released, so clearly they could release version 1.5 of RIS without (...) (25 years ago, 2-Jul-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
23 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
|
|
|
|
