Goodbye IFI?

[wilsonmw04]

Originally Posted by Adam Y.

You do know the definition of the word vex right? The word itself only draws negative connotations that it probably would be a good idea to change the name. I'm still slightly confused about why IFI named it vex in the first place.

I'm not sure that IFI created the Vex package. RadioShack was selling them until the beginning of this year and IFI bought the "Vex" name and/or rights to sell the product. Who actually came up with the name? I have no clue.

I'm just glad they are being open about this transition period. I just bought a new starter kit for the upcoming year. Glad it won't be funds wasted.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by wilsonmw04

I'm not sure that IFI created the Vex package. RadioShack was selling them until the beginning of this year and IFI bought the "Vex" name and/or rights to sell the product. Who actually came up with the name? I have no clue.

IFI developed VEX. Radio Shack just sold it. When Radio Shack quit, IFI sold the kits and parts online.

Pleases do not state things that you don't know to be true. What I have seen in this thread is at least 99% speculation, if not more. I'm going to wait for the official word on this to come out, if it really happens to be true.Could IFI be quitting FIRST? Possibly. I have, however, seen no evidence of this. Even the first post had some things that could have other reasons; e.g. the kitbot trannies to BaneBots trannies could have simply been trying something new or "advertising" for BB. Let's look at each piece of "evidence" and see what all the possible reasons could be and then see if it looks like IFI is stopping their support.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by EricH

e.g. the kitbot trannies to BaneBots trannies could have simply been trying something new or "advertising" for BB. Let's look at each piece of "evidence" and see what all the possible reasons could be and then see if it looks like IFI is stopping their support.

The kitbot point is misleading in the first place. While they may have been sold by IFI, they were the brainchild of Paul Copioli, not IFI.

[Adam Y.]

vex (vks)
tr.v. vexed, vex·ing, vex·es

2. To cause perplexity in; puzzle.
I believe this is the reason. And I agree with Bharat's assessment wondering why FIRST would change the name if changing to another kit was not eminent.

It's generally is a negative type of conotation within the context of frustration.

Have any of you noticed that FIRST and Microsoft are partnering for the 2008 season(1)(2)? BUT if many of you didn't know Microsoft has its own little robotics program called Microsoft Robotics Studio(3)? Now I don't know if I'm crazy or doing some math wrong but, Microsoft is HUGE and has the potential to invest a TON of money into the FIRST programs. Now for me, FIRST + Microsoft = A new tree of ideas, parts, and people = Smaller companies (IFI) will be kicked out.

Uggg... That's a horrible idea. Microsoft Robotics Studio is a great looking program but it's just way to complicated for FIRST. You would have to give out computers to every single team because it requires a computer to run the robot. It's just so much easier to use an embedded processor.

[ZZII 527]

Originally Posted by Adam Y.

Uggg... That's a horrible idea. Microsoft Robotics Studio is a great looking program but it's just way to complicated for FIRST. You would have to give out computers to every single team because it requires a computer to run the robot. It's just so much easier to use an embedded processor.

Is that true? I thought MSRS can be used as basically an emulator and can eventually offload the entire program onto the robot hardware. So MSRS is more like a combination of MPLAB and EasyC, but there still needs to be some kind of hardware embedded controller, which could be anything. (Right now there are about eight supported systems, including MindStorms and the iRobot Create, but I suspect this will grow.)

[Adam Y.]

Originally Posted by ZZII 527

Is that true? I thought MSRS can be used as basically an emulator and can eventually offload the entire program onto the robot hardware. So MSRS is more like a combination of MPLAB and EasyC, but there still needs to be some kind of hardware embedded controller, which could be anything. (Right now there are about eight supported systems, including MindStorms and the iRobot Create, but I suspect this will grow.)

It's more complicated and powerful than MPLAB and EasyC by far. There really is no reason why any robot couldn't be controlled using it. I think the most flexibility comes from running it within the robot itself. A speaker from Microsoft was actually controlling a robot that was running MSRS from a web browser. He showed how you can start and stop any subroutine using any computer that has a webrowser (With emphasis on any webrowser).

[Cody Carey]

I am just posting this as a note to all the people Who are telling everyone that speculation is wrong, and a bad Idea. It is not. This is an open forum, and the community can speculate all they want about whatever subject(s) they want... and it will do nobody any harm. There is no "situation" to be blown out of proportion, and If IFI is leaving first, who cares? They have been wonderful partners, but the only reason to morn their leaving this early in the game is fear of change. As pointed out in the first post and many subsequent ones, there ARE reasons to suspect first's leaving IFI, and as a group of innovative, thinking people... Why not discuss the future?

[Madison]

Originally Posted by Cody Carey

I am just posting this as a note to all the people Who are telling everyone that speculation is wrong, and a bad Idea. It is not. This is an open forum, and the community can speculate all they want about whatever subject(s) they want... and it will do nobody any harm. There is no "situation" to be blown out of proportion, and If IFI is leaving first, who cares? They have been wonderful partners, but the only reason to morn their leaving this early in the game is fear of change. As pointed out in the first post and many subsequent ones, there ARE reasons to suspect first's leaving IFI, and as a group of innovative, thinking people... Why not discuss the future?

Speculation in and of itself isn't terrible, of course, but the source of such speculation can lead to problems. If someone has access to privileged information and shares that information with someone else, they've made an error in judgement. That error is somewhat mitigated, you might say, if the person they share it with has some sense of responsibility or appreciation for that privileged information and what it means to those it belongs to. Running to the internet and writing, "I heard," or "someone told me," could be a great way to get someone fired or worse.

I merely cautioned folks to think carefully about what information they think they might have and whether it's prudent to share it on this public forum.

[Tim Delles]

Ok so i have read this a few times and I have been up to date with everything here.

Now i do know that IFI employees do surf CD very often. Now not to put them on any spot or anything (they may not know of any plans that may exist with FIRST or the lack there of) but if you know anything can you please fill the FIRST community in on it.

***Thanks Alan, i was planning on putting the following part in but forgot***

We understand that most of the time if you know something you can't say it. But if you are allowed to speak on this topic can you please let us know.

[sanddrag]

I'm a little uneasy about this "tactic" that seems to come up on CD fairly often in recent times. It seems like we create and then stir these rumors and/or controversies until FIRST or someone else has no choice but to come out and settle them. And I'm not so sure that's too thrilling for them. I say we just learn to have a little more patience.

[Kevin Sevcik]

I'll ditto M. Krass. Some around FIRST corporate almost certainly know what's coming, but they're obviously not going to talk and anyone who's heard something is probably putting their job and/or reputation at risk by talking. Asking IFI people to comment on things that FIRST obviously doesn't want bandied about is just silly. I think speculating that they're doomed and being kicked out is just as silly and possibly a bit mean. Think about this, If they're being dropped by FIRST, you're just constantly reminding them of the business they're losing in 2 years. If they're not, you're just annoying them by implying they can't design something to satisfy FIRST.

I'm just as curious as everyone else, and more or less just as in the dark, but I don't think wild speculation on something of this import is terribly productive. It's a bit different than the constant rumor of a water game, after all.

That said, I really, really, really don't want to have anything to do with the MS Robotics Studio. I'd rather keep the option of switching to Linux and avoiding Vista, and most other control system options atleast leave that as a possibility.

[Nuttyman54]

To re-iterate what Sanddrag said, FIRST will inform us of any changes when they feel the time is right. Would knowing RIGHT NOW instead of in a few months really affect you that much?

If FIRST is, in fact, moving away from IFI, then now is probably the worst time to be sharing information publicly about what is going on.

[JesseK]

This is all pure speculation, but it seems fairly logical to me:

I would assume that the move away from the IFI controller isn't simply a move away from IFI, it's a move away from the PIC 18F series of microcontrollers. I programmed an 18F452C in college, using assembly, and I promise you that it has multiple limitations many modern-day programmers would rather not deal with -- like no nesting, no recursion, and procedure/spaghetti-based coding practices. These are all based upon constructs that directly contradict what students and new mentors are taught in college about OOP, which is where high-level programming is these days. You also have to come up with extremely complex algorithms to have any optimised code currently, and it's not exactly easy to teach students Calc.-3/Linear Algebra concepts to a high school student who hasn't been through Algebra 2.

On top of that, some people may have missed the announcement of a NASA robotics platform that was released. While I have yet to review this platform myself it does seem like an easier way for NASA to use this robotics program to help create useful ideas/solutions while teaching the younger generation in the process. It makes sense that FIRST would move to a controller that has the capability to run this platform -- after all, NASA is a big funder of FIRST just like IFI.

------

If you were old enough to understand it, you might remember way back in the late 90's when the cable companies entered the internet arena. The phone companies were all in a panic and everyone was worried about a new standard of internet coming of age. Well in all actuality all it did was bring about competition to the phone companies since they were keeping the high-speed internet lines at equally high prices -- at which point the consumer was getting screwed. Cable changed all of that, and look -- we're about to be able to get 25Mbps here in DC, something that was unfathomable in the late 90's.

Competition is good, let's hope IFI can step up.

[Adam Y.]

I programmed an 18F452C in college, using assembly, and I promise you that it has multiple limitations many modern-day programmers would rather not deal with -- like no nesting, no recursion, and procedure/spaghetti-based coding practices. These are all based upon constructs that directly contradict what students and new mentors are taught in college about OOP, which is where high-level programming is these days.

The problem is that what you describe is a limitation of almost all of the embedded devices that compete with the PICs. Typically, programing techniques that won't cause problems on a computer will typically cause enormous problems in a microprocessor.

[Doug G]

Originally Posted by JesseK

This is all pure speculation, but it seems fairly logical to me:

I would assume that the move away from the IFI controller isn't simply a move away from IFI, it's a move away from the PIC 18F series of microcontrollers. I programmed an 18F452C in college, using assembly, and I promise you that it has multiple limitations many modern-day programmers would rather not deal with -- like no nesting, no recursion, and procedure/spaghetti-based coding practices.

I'm not a software guy, but to say IF they move away from a PIC based system, does that mean moving away from Microchip products? If that's the case, I find this hard to believe with Steve Sanghi, President and CEO of Microchip, so integrally involved with FIRST, on the Board of FIRST, supplier, sponsor, etc...