Lego Mindstorms: What went wrong?

[Cyberguy34000]

Well I was surfing slashdot yesterday and came across this thread, Which is pretty much a discussion of an article entitled: Lego Mindstorms: What Went Wrong?. Honestly, I'm a little dumbfounded by the article, and I really wonder where this guy is coming from, but I'd like to know what you guys think.

Post away!

[Ryan M.]

I can see some of where he's coming from. The lack of any serious improvements to the Mindstorms line does indicate a lack of interest (at least on the surface) in the product line by LEGO. On the other hand, they could have been spending the last few years creating LEGO Vista Mindstorms.

Oh, wait, bad comparison at the end there.

[Andrew Blair]

One thing in the slashdot thread that makes some sense is to sell better main units. Adults are using these devices, and adults tire of only being able to use 3 motors and three sensors. Expand, compound, make more appealing units that cost lots of money!

[JoeXIII'007]

Originally Posted by From the Article

Lego needs to introduce a new product line that can serve as a vehicle for developing Lego literacy. One idea for such a product line is to have sets based around important concepts and mechanisms. For instance, the product line can have one set for introducing people to torque and gears, another to demonstrate more sophisticated parts like the clutch gear, and yet another to cover pulleys and belts. The quality of the documentation bundled with the sets will make or break any such effort, so Lego will need to include documentation that stimulates thinking, emphasizes problem solving, and encourages experimentation and creative play. The documentation can achieve these goals by providing individuals with readily digestible information, as well as by leading them through exercises and experiments that build intuition. Lego should also add programmability to such sets but this should be done selectively, without creating dependencies amongst sets, and in a manner consistent with the overall goal of the product line.

I could use something along this line to help mentor the FLL team at the nearby middle school. The students I mentor, though young and great thinkers, have a hard time working with the set, because it requires such advanced thinking in order to utilize it correctly. Even I cannot build a robust robot out of that set (which is embarrassing, considering I've had 3 years to tinker with it.) I can build good models, not great.

It is because of its advanced concept that the Mindstorm was doomed, and that is what I think latif was trying to get to with the article.

I also find it shocking at how cheap the set really is when it comes to true manufacturing costs (as the article pointed out).

With all that in mind, the point is that the Mindstorms set never really reached out to the common man, and in particular, the common LEGO thinker tinkerer.

-Joe

[artdutra04]

Originally Posted by JoeXIII'007

I could use something along this line to help mentor the FLL team at the nearby middle school. The students I mentor, though young and great thinkers, have a hard time working with the set, because it requires such advanced thinking in order to utilize it correctly. Even I cannot build a robust robot out of that set (which is embarrassing, considering I've had 3 years to tinker with it.) I can build good models, not great.

It is because of its advanced concept that the Mindstorm was doomed, and that is what I think latif was trying to get to with the article.

The Lego Mindstorms line, at least IMHO, was and is not too advanced for its target age category of 9-14. The Lego Mindstorms line was intended to be an "educational" product, in which playing with it was a learning experience. Therefore, it was never meant to "be mastered" by everyone, but rather provide a vehicle for people to learn and become better.

I used to play with Lego Mindstorms kits a lot before the days of Vex, and I made some pretty cool things. One of my favorite was a locking drivetrain robot that I helped to create when I mentored two Lego League teams last year. Inside the uberly robust chassis, there was a rotation sensor and a motor that would physically lock the two different motors for each side of the robot together. That way, they robot would drive perfectly straight, and using a rotation sensor, it could very accurately measure distance and turning. Here are some pictures of it:



The locking motor and rotation sensor:

Originally Posted by Andrew Blair

One thing in the slashdot thread that makes some sense is to sell better main units. Adults are using these devices, and adults tire of only being able to use 3 motors and three sensors. Expand, compound, make more appealing units that cost lots of money!

That is where Vex comes in. I think that Vex may steal the adult hobby robotics market from the Lego Mindstorms kits. For many years, people have been hacking the RCX'x to allow for more motor and sensor ports, and to create custom sensors. Now they already have a controller off the shelf that can basically be plug-and-play with any PWM servo, PWM speed controller, or any +5v sensor with the Vex kits.

[eiii]

The Mindstorm is definitly aimed towards younger kids, but there doesn't seem to be a huge amount of interest among them. Also, they're kinda costly.

[Beth Sweet]

Originally Posted by eiii

The Mindstorm is definitly aimed towards younger kids, but there doesn't seem to be a huge amount of interest among them. Also, they're kinda costly.

I think you hit the nail on the head. Kids have a lot of toys aimed at them and in the minds of most, this is a toy like all the others. It is just too expensive in the minds of most and doesn't really offer too much more than other toys.

[greencactus3]

ive never touched a vex kit so i cant say much about that but as for mindstorms, the more time you put in the more you can get out of it. if you wanna just tinker with it and not worry about just using lego pieces, sensors are not hard to make, and 3 sensors? pffft. even with the ris2.0 ive been able to stick in as many touchsensors as i want. all you need are switches. available from your local broken electrical appliances. and wire and time and soldering skills help but w/e. motors, think of relays. and then if you make a transmission... and with 2 motors you can theoretically have infinite functions.... you just cant do them all at the same time.. btu thats why you have 3 motors. lol. but its theoretical because the more functions you add the more power the motor's gonna need to do the same output. so well. im blabbing on agian.
anyways. the rcx is a great startig block.. i love how you can expand using only lego parts too. multiple rcx communication is great. and yea. i love it.

oh and lego's target ages are miles off. or ages off... or they just dont work.
i know some people who cant build the a decent looking car at my age right now. so its all about how much you've been using legos, or knex, or any osrt of building "toy" ............ ok... lost waht i was gonna say. nvm.

[Andrew Schuetze]

I haven't read the original reference for this thread but here is my take.

The RCX hardware seems to be the limiting factor. NQC , Java ... have been developed to provide a textual interface that gives one more programming power. However, the advanced user will want to use a third party interface like the Handy board and now the new Gameboy interface from Charmed Labs. Botball is really getting a lot out of the lego robot kit with the later two hardware interfaces.

http://www.charmedlabs.com

[Ian Curtis]

Remember a few years back when rumors flew that LEGO was cancelling the Mindstorms line? If I remember LEGO came within inches but didn't cross the border. Whew

I recieved a Mindstorms kit for christmas in either '99 or 2000. I played around with it for a while and then after a few simple carts kinda lost interest in it. Meanwhile my dad and one of my cousin built 3 axis arms and the like. I thought it was cool but never thought I could do it. My dad pretty much fell in love with it though and the following year my school had an FLL team. I immediately fell in love with FLL.

That being said, I think the kits are too open ended for the 9-12 age range. Having a competition like FLL however students are given something to work towards and are rewarding in a competitive atmosphere for their work, amoung their peers.

Also I believe that Mindstorms could be used much like Vex, if you get people to realize what complex things you can do. For example take this (its at the bottom of the newsletter) Mindstorms robot capable of moving 60 pounds! I consider any FLL team who can get everything on the table done 90% of the time to have created a piece of engineering equal to an FRC team who could cap a vision tetra 90% of the time.

(The only sad thing about this forum is it inevitably gets less traffic than the general forum, so most likely this topic will not be as well developed. Sigh... )

[jeffmorris]

I think that I wasted my money on LEGO Mindstorms sets and LEGO building sets. Is it possible to combine the LEGO Technic parts with the VEX Robotics parts?

[Al Skierkiewicz]

I cannot tell you how often this thread has appeared over the years. Virtually since the beginning of FLL someone comes up with a line about Lego dropping, cancelling support, modifying or selling off the Mindstorms product line. Untill I hear it from a Lego exec, I wouldn't believe it.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by jeffmorris

Is it possible to combine the LEGO Technic parts with the VEX Robotics parts?

I don't think so. The hole spacing is different, I think. I have toyed with both systems. (2 different Mindstorms sets and a bit with the family VEX set)

[greencactus3]

Originally Posted by EricH

I don't think so. The hole spacing is different, I think. I have toyed with both systems. (2 different Mindstorms sets and a bit with the family VEX set)

are you kidding. everything is possible. thats why these are so fun. ive combined lego and knex, erector(was it?), and too many nonconventional parts to list. vaccuum cleaners, oh which i actually have a video of. one of the first models i made when i got the mindstorms kit. and 15 lbs barbells... makes for a nice trebuche(sp?). yea. i reccomend that as a project to anyone interested in learning more about making beefier lego projects. the bracing required to keep a model together with 15lbs of swinging weight was lets say.... intense. i learned so much from building that.. well. point is. everything is adaptable somehow.

[KarenH]

The article discussed the production cost of the RCX--supposedly less than $1.00. The RCX currently retails for $119 on the Lego website, but is "Not Available" (and wasn't several weeks ago, when I researched the possibility of an upgrade for the FLL team my son is mentoring). Since the Mindstorms RIS set itself costs $199, it's almost more cost effective to just buy another RIS set.

So, the most important part of the set is both ridiculously expensive and officially irreplaceable. Such a practice won't endear Lego to American consumers who are interested in getting a good value.

I also found the concept of "Lego literacy" interesting. I used to play with Legos when I was a kid, but I think I would be unable to do anything with the newer, fancier, and over-specialized kits sold these days. (I really don't want transparent pink bat wings on my little brick boat, thank you!) But I think the Mindstorms kit offers excellent mentoring possibilities between the older Lego-literate maniacs and the interested but Lego-illiterate younger kids.