Subject:
|
Re: **** the Scout ****
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Sun, 14 Nov 1999 03:33:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
818 times
|
| |
|
|
In article <0.6488dbec.255f3519@aol.com>, BMajik5127@aol.com wrote:
> Hi I was wondering what is the better product the Scout or the RCX brick?
> I own the RCX but I dont know much about the Scout any hlep much appreciated.
> Thanks
> -Mike
Here is a copy of a post I made to rec.toys.lego a few hours ago...
Seeing as the Scout is relatively new and the RCX has been around for over
a year, there is quite a bit more information on the RCX than the Scout.
As a result, the "verdict" of how good the Scout actually is will likely
change over the next few months as more people work with it and challenge
its limits. Bear in mind that presently the RCX is being used in ways
(NQC, legOS, pbFORTH, custom sensors, etc) that weren't around at
introduction.
With that caveat, here's some information about Scout vs. RCX.
I/O: The RCX has 3 inputs / 3 outputs and can use active as well as
passive sensors for input (touch, temperature, light, rotation, plus
custom ones). The Scout has two inputs plus a built-in light sensor. The
inputs are passive only (touch and temperature). The Scout also has two
outputs. From a flexibility standpoint, the RCX wins here - more I/O,
more flexibility for sensors.
Stand-Alone: The RCX can only be programmed from an external host
computer. The Scout can be programmed using its own display and
controls. This is a big win if you want to play and don't have a computer
handy.
Downloading Programs: Initially, the Scout was touted as a self-contained
system (no PC required), but TLG has indicated an SDK will be published
showing how to download programs to the Scout. Information here is still
sketchy, but it sounds like the bytecodes used by the Scout are a little
more sophisticated than those used by the RCX. This would in turn suggest
more programming power at the bytecode level (at least for now).
Firmware: From the initial specs, it appears that the Scout's firmware is
all in ROM, whereas the RCX's was split between ROM and RAM. This allowed
custom firmware to be developed for the RCX (legOS, pbFORTH). Currently
it doesn't appear that this is an option for the Scout, although this
could change depending on what information TLG releases and how much
people hack the Scout. The flexibility of the RCX's firmware in RAM means
that TLG can upgrade the firmware at a later date. They have hinted that
some of the improvements in the Scout bytecodes will eventually make their
way to the RCX firmware.
Price: The Scout is cheaper. I don't know about buying it stand-alone,
but as a kit, we're talking $150 instead of $200.
Personal Opinion: clearly the Scout doesn't replace the RCX. Think of the
RCX as a high end product, the Scout as a mid-tier product, and the
Micro-Scout as low-tier. Each have their uses. My personal advice would
be to go with the RCX provided that you are willing to use a PC to program
it and you can afford it. For younger children, perhaps the
self-contained nature of Scout programming is a better introduction to
Mindstorms. Certainly TLG's age recommendations seem to suggest this.
For those who already have an RCX, the Scout may be a more cost-effective
means of I/O expansion than buying another RCX. At this point, however,
not many people have played with this combination so there isn't a lot of
info on what can and cannot be done.
Dave Baum
--
reply to: dbaum at enteract dot com
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | **** the Scout ****
|
| Hi I was wondering what is the better product the Scout or the RCX brick? I own the RCX but I dont know much about the Scout any hlep much appreciated. Thanks -Mike (25 years ago, 13-Nov-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
2 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
Active threads in Robotics
|
|
|
|
|
|
