To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.roboticsOpen lugnet.robotics in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Robotics / 8538
8537  |  8539
Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on NQC for Scout
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.robotics
Date: 
Thu, 25 Nov 1999 03:50:37 GMT
Viewed: 
480 times
  
In lugnet.robotics, Dave Baum writes:
[...] Ideally, I would like to allow NQC to target the Scout.
However, in order to do this I will need to know the Scout's
download protocol and its bytecode format.

I suspect the official line from Lego is presently something
like this: "use the ScoutDos.exe assembler as a back end for NQC".

That is definitely true, at least right now. Everyone who downloaded the Scout
SDK agreed not to "reverse-engineer" it, and that includes figuring out the
download protocol or bytecode format.

As I see it, the only way the download protocol or bytecode format are going to
become legally available is if someone figures it out on their own, without
having interacted with any of us. You can't just recruit someone to do the work
for you, because asking someone to do it makes you partly responsible for what
they have done, and you would still be considered guilty of
reverse-engineering.

[...]
As I see it, there are three alternatives here:

1) Hack it [...]
2) Get official information from Lego. [...]
3) Forget it - no NQC for Scout.  Personally this is OK with me.
I have more than enough RCX's and don't need to use a Scout for
possible expansion.

I agree -- how many people want to do the types of things you need NQC for and
not want more sensors and motors at the same time? Not very many, I suspect.
The Scout makes a great motor-controller add-on for the RCX, and that's about
all the hardcore users are doing to be doing with it.

- Robert Munafo                                        www.mrob.com



Message has 1 Reply:
  Legalities of reverse-engineering (was: Re: Thoughts on NQC for Scout)
 
[Disclaimer: IANAL!] (...) Hmm, I'm not so sure. Did everyone actually *really* agree not to reverse- engineer it? Look closer at the license agreement[1]...it says that you may not: (ii) modify, translate, reverse engineer, decompile, disassemble (...) (25 years ago, 25-Nov-99, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.robotics.scout)

Message is in Reply To:
  Thoughts on NQC for Scout
 
With the advent of the Scout SDK, several people have asked me if I plan on making NQC available for Scout. I thought it would be appropriate to summarize my position on this and post it... The Scout SDK looks quite interesting - clearly the Scout (...) (25 years ago, 20-Nov-99, to lugnet.robotics)

4 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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR