Re: Microsoft Regional
 

So far I'm pretty sure no one has.... Why keep keep trotting out that canard? Who would think that folks would keep claiming attacks have occured?

Wondering aloud about something that is perfectly plausible and that is not improbable, is not attacking. Accurately describing (and the description does have to be accurate) is not attacking.

Implicit in Pavan's comments are a sentiment very similar to what I expressed. To wit: I suspect that he is delighted by all of Microsoft's efforts to inspire students. Other efforts, well... not so much delight. He can correct me if I am wrong.

It is (almost) suprising how much folks talk "past" each other in this thread.

Blake

Re: Microsoft Regional
 

I think the tempered enthusiasm displayed for Microsoft's larger participation and support of FIRST in this thread falls squarely in line with my original statement. I don't necessarily believe that anyone is attacking Microsoft in any specific manner -- though the distaste for the company and its products is evident among some posts.

There are few selfless acts and I don't believe that supporting FIRST is among them. The companies that support FIRST, especially at a high dollar level, do so with understanding that their sponsorship is an investment with reciprocal benefits. FIRST and its participating teams receive the support they need, in the form of money, professionals and products, to keep "raising the bar," while the sponsors receive enormous mindshare among the next generation of their workforce and increased familiarity with their products and services. Everyone benefits from these relationships to some degree -- General Motors, NASA, and IFI included -- and to expect that some other company would sign on without wanting a piece of that pie is, perhaps, a bit too idealistic for our existing culture. Maybe some day in the future, if we do what we're here to do, things will change.

I think that discussion about conflicts of interest as they pertain to FIRST sponsors could be engaging and interesting, but I don't quite see why it is that Microsoft's involvement is the catalyst that might spark such a conversation. I don't perceive their position among FIRST's other sponsors as being particularly unique and, in fact, I'd argue that there are extant sponsorship agreements that more closely resemble the doomsday "conflict of interest" scenario Pavan seems to be considering in his posts.

Re: Microsoft Regional
 

The unique situation here is the coming together of four things.

1) Microsoft has announced a robotics programming system with far-reaching goals.
2) FIRST has announced a new FRC control system for the 2009 season (simultaneously giving no details and asking for user input using questions that make it seem that the decision has already been made).
3) FIRST is being alternately mysterious and dismissive about the role of VEX in its upcoming programs.
4) Microsoft is sponsoring a regional.

These things might not be related, but it's human nature to seek patterns in noisy data.

Re: Microsoft Regional
 

I guess I don't understand how, if they are related, that makes this situation much different than existing and past sponsorship agreements.

Re: Microsoft Regional
 

I believe that i heard somewhere that the 2009 controller will be an IFI product, just a very updated one.

Re: Microsoft Regional
 

Bah! All speculation! Everyone stop posting speculation (in this and other threads)... between some local FIRST things and talking to some FIRSTers online I have heard 10+ "I heard somewhere that...." but none are true.... Just wait until we get some details.

On the other hand, I'd love it if they stuck with IFI (kind of a customer loyalty thing, ya know?). They have many years of experience in FIRST that would help in the creation of a new controller.

Re: Microsoft Regional
 

IFI is NOT involved with the controller at this point.

Re: On Microsoft's Increased Sponsorship of FIRST // Was: Microsoft Regional
 

I've changed the title of this thread and moved it to the general forum since there's very little discussion about the specific details of the event itself and, now that I have such information to share, I'll be creating a new thread in the "regional competitions" forum.

Re: On Microsoft's Increased Sponsorship of FIRST // Was: Microsoft Regional
 

I love IFI as much as the next person, and I would hate more than anything to see it go, but honestly, I don't see anything wrong with one of the worlds largest companies coming in to sponsor FIRST. Everyone may hate Microsoft for this and that, but in the end, its still all good for FIRST.

The only bad thing about Microsoft coming in is that it leans more and more towards the theory that IFI is being replaced by MS, which is very unfortunate.

Re: On Microsoft's Increased Sponsorship of FIRST // Was: Microsoft Regional
 

Ok so almost everyone here is saying that MS is taking over FIRST because they have 1 regional... one little regional in the northwest. ok so:

does that mean that BAE tried to take over FIRST when they brought a regional back to the founding state of NH?

does does that mean that UTC has tried to take over FIRST because they sponsor a lot of teams around the Hartford area and the regional in Hartford?

Heck what about NASA... they sponsor the MOST teams in first, and have a regional. are they taking over?


Yes FIRST may move to use MS product in 2009, but they may not. No one in FIRST or MS has come out and said we have made a partnership to do this and that. What they have said is they will sponsor a regional, putting it in Seattle so that teams don't have to drive 10 hours to get to the closest regional.

As for MS taking over FIRST, that is going to be nearly impossible. Honestly, they would have to convince the entire FIRST staff that MS was right, but how could they do that when FIRST has a goal, a goal they are very driven to.

I believe that Dean, Woodie and the rest of the gang are smart enough to realize if MS tries to do this, and they would inevitably deal with this (atleast i hope)

Re: On Microsoft's Increased Sponsorship of FIRST // Was: Microsoft Regional
 

it's nothing to get upset about at all! FIRST is a program that is designed to help kids towards a future in science/tech. it takes money to do these things (lots of money now because of the incredibly wide expansion for FIRST). Whether it's a huge corporation that has monopolized or a small business that is run independently, any additional help, funding and interest to spread the word of FIRST is recognized and appreciated. i don't think this should really be a problem that anyone should be concerned with. if youre upset that it is particularly microsoft because of their 'greed' and 'want to take over the world,' shouldn't we get upset about lockheed martin's relation to building and creating items that could also be used with world domination? it's just illlogical to get upset. lets celebrate!

Re: On Microsoft's Increased Sponsorship of FIRST // Was: Microsoft Regional
 

I don't have any issue with Microsoft sponsoring a regional, or even providing some kind of software support, such as a compiler, or IDE. What I don't want to see happen is a Microsoft product becoming a "standard." Microsoft is not a robotics company so it would be a great opportunity for Microsoft to get its foot in the door with FIRST. The problem begins when thousands of people start using their "standard" and then we're stuck using their stuff for years to come. Look at the OOXML fiasco which is happening right now for an example of this.

I think it's a mistake moving away from a proven system. The IFI controller is powerful, and very customizable if you really get into it. The ability to use a language like C is great, and I would not like to have to program a robot in C# or any .NET language for that fact. Also keep in mind, if FIRST goes with Microsoft's control system, people who prefer to program in alternative operating systems can kiss that privilege goodbye.

Re: On Microsoft's Increased Sponsorship of FIRST // Was: Microsoft Regional
 

Microsoft sponsoring a regional is a great thing. They have money, and that's exactly what FIRST needs. Plus, they're expanding the program. At this stage in time, it's all positive gains. As long as I'm not forced to use an unstable product on my robot (read: If my bot BSod's, I will be VERY unhappy), then it's all chill.


Seriously folks. Why can't we all just sit back and wait for things to unfold? It seems as if every week there's a new whine-fest (pardon the expression, but they're really frustrating!) showing up on here, mostly made up of speculation and opinions that were recently formed based on rumors.


So I think we all need to take a communal deep breath, relax, and go back to freaking about about dlavery's red herrings.

[/.2cents]

Re: On Microsoft's Increased Sponsorship of FIRST // Was: Microsoft Regional
 

The game between the two this passed Saturday was so terrible I turned it off after 10 minutes to watch the TN-FL game.

After learning how much it costs to simply RENT THE VENUE FOR A SINGLE REGIONAL for the 3 days per regional we need, I applaud Microsoft for their efforts in sponsoring engineering education. The aforementioned financial dollar amount is well into 6 figures if I have my numbers correct.

The fact that there are several currently-unaddressed bugs that irritate the crap outta me on my new laptop that has Vista will undoubtedly make me cautious when approaching the subject of whether or not their influence into our FRC controllers is a good thing. If Microsoft prys and prys and attempts to get a long-standing implementation of their robotics platform as the official FRC controller, I seriously doubt I can continue believing that FIRST isn't full of themselves in their beliefs. This in no way affects my thanks to Microsoft in supporting the Seattle Regional.

So blatently narrowing down the field to one specific platform has both hurt and helped FIRST teams in their rookie and onward seasons. Simplicity vs. Limitations is a huge balance between the variety of experience of teams out there. Becoming limited to a single-platform controller would be the first mistake FIRST makes if they go with Microsoft for the controller -- the one good thing that Microsoft is extremely good at is ensuring that you only have the open doors that you're "allowed" to go through. Attempting it any other way seems to be nearly impossible without spending a ridiculous amount of time on it or you perchance can find another hack into IE browser "robot edition"

I that said, I don't want Microsoft as the new platform on the controller -- not because of their history of whatever you can find, but because of their history of the Microsoft-everything dependency.

Re: On Microsoft's Increased Sponsorship of FIRST // Was: Microsoft Regional
 

For those that do not understand corporate America, let me state a few things.

Corporations are not in business to help FIRST or any other group. They are not in business to give anyone gainful employment. They are not in business to be good corporate citizens.

They ARE in buisiness to make money for their shareholders or owners. Any buisiness that forgets this is generally not in business for long.

They make their money by dominating (ar attempting to) their chosen markets. Microsoft is no exception to this. In this case they see a potential emerging market that they are well suited to be a major player in. At the same time they get to appear as being a good corporate citizen by helping the students learn and be creative. For Microsoft, this is a win-win situation.

Should we question Microsofts motivations when accepting their charity? Absolutely, just as we should question EVERY doners motivation. BAE, Microsoft, MIT, NASA, Parker, Bimba, Andy-Mark, Small Parts, Etc they all have motivation to support FIRST ... and we, as the recipiants of that charity are obliged to question that motivation.

Is Microsoft just being charitable by supporting the Seattle regional? No, getting their name on the regional gives them name recognition in the robotics emerging market. Does that mean that we should not accept their charity? Again no. As long as we understand their motivations, and those motivations do not stand counter to our beliefs in FIRST, then both the goals of FIRST and the goals of Microsoft can be met. Win-Win.