New Robot Control System!

[Madison]

Originally Posted by Marc P.

Considering the history of how they became one of the largest tech companies in the world, I'm not so sure that's something FIRST students should look up to, considering the emphasis of gracious professionalism within the program.

Admittedly, I don't know very much about the history of the company -- but that said, I can't imagine that Microsoft has committed a corporate sin any worse than many of FIRST's other major sponsors. We're not exactly in the company of saints here.

Microsoft's employees have been an outstanding source of support for our team on many levels and we're really excited to see the company itself becoming more involved in FIRST and its programs.

[Dave Flowerday]

Originally Posted by M. Krass

but that said, I can't imagine that Microsoft has committed a corporate sin any worse than many of FIRST's other major sponsors

I'm not so sure about that. Microsoft has been convicted for illegally abusing their monopoly in the US and European Union. They lied in court and were even caught red-handed forging video evidence to back up the lie. I'm sure many of FIRST's corporate sponsors have skeletons in their closets too, but these are some pretty serious "sins" from Microsoft.

Personally, I dislike them because I feel Microsoft is largely responsible for the opinion held by many in the world that software which malfunctions, crashes, doesn't do what it's supposed to, etc. is acceptable. I know many, many other companies contribute to this problem as well, but they're really the ones who convinced the public that this is OK. I don't think any other engineering discipline would tolerate the shoddiness that is often considered acceptable and standard practice in software engineering today. I actually had someone say to me once, "Office crashes on me a few times a week, so why should our product have to be any better than that?" That really ticked me off as an engineer.

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by M. Krass

...I can't imagine that Microsoft has committed a corporate sin any worse than many of FIRST's other major sponsors.

You don't need to invoke imagination. Their corporate sins are a matter of legal record. Only Enron and Standard Oil come to mind as having been more egregiously "corporate" to the exclusion of their customers' interests.

As with any large organization, the people who make up the company are usually much nicer and well-behaved on an individual basis than the combined entity is, but that doesn't change the legitimate distaste many people have for The Microsoft Corporation's behavior as a whole.

[Richard Wallace]

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson

You don't need to invoke imagination. Their corporate sins are a matter of legal record. ....

Wow! That's some record of corporate sins! The judge's finding begins

"These consolidated civil antitrust actions alleging violations of the Sherman Act, §§ 1 and 2, and various state statutes by the defendant Microsoft Corporation, were tried to the Court, sitting without a jury, between October 19, 1998, and June 24, 1999. The Court has considered the record evidence submitted by the parties, made determinations as to its relevancy and materiality, assessed the credibility of the testimony of the witnesses, both written and oral, and ascertained for its purposes the probative significance of the documentary and visual evidence presented. Upon the record before the Court as of July 28, 1999, at the close of the admission of evidence, pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 52(a), the Court finds the following facts to have been proved by a preponderance of the evidence."

and then continues for over 200 pages in the original document format! Jurists are reknowned for verbosity, but even so, 200 pages!

[Madison]

I created a new thread (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...threadid=58519) that might be a better venue for discussing the extent to which corporate and personal behavior outside FIRST should impact involvement in the program -- as it appears that's where this discussion is headed. So, that said, please respond to the new thread if you'd like to talk more about that subject and here only if you're talking about the new control system.

Thanks.

(Or, y'know, privately message me with your objections and I'll go back to doing my job instead of reading CD. )

[Fred Sayre]

Originally Posted by Dave Flowerday

Personally, I dislike them because I feel Microsoft is largely responsible for the opinion held by many in the world that software which malfunctions, crashes, doesn't do what it's supposed to, etc. is acceptable.

I agree that this practice is avoidable but many people would choose not to make the sacrifice for that alternative. People still choose a PC that can work with thousands upon thousands of different hardware and software configurations and yet they will still criticize Microsoft for imperfect compatibility. If you lock down those configurations (like Apple) some people opt for that sacrifice of diversity and price for something a bit more reliable. Even when Microsoft seeks to fix these problems - like with user authentication controls, people complain endlessly. Unfortunately you can't expect everything from Microsoft and complain when they in actuality do a pretty good job at satisfying such a large and diverse group of users.

I would still rather have something that does what I want it to do - even if it crashes from time to time, than something that is incapable or too costly.

People buy devices that are made to work reliably and consistently - like video game consoles. More and more now though you find people altering them to run their own software and upgrade the hardware. This is can be risky, voiding warranties and putting reliability into question, but many people would still choose the freedom of having options with their devices.

[Ryan Dognaux]

Originally Posted by Greg Needel

I can understand FIRST's reasoning for not taking major partnerships with cigarette and alcohol due to the perception, but not taking on Microsoft for those same reasons is just a silly argument. Just because there is a portion of FIRST students and mentors who dislike Microsoft for whatever reason that a partnership with one of the largest tech companies in the world should be ignored.

FIRST is always wanting to reach every school in some way, that's always some part of Dean's homework. Teaming up with Microsoft could be one sure fire way to do it, so I don't know why anyone would reject that kind of support. Seems silly to me.

[Pat McCarthy]

There seems to have been a lot of discussion and passionate opinions expressed in this thread about the things desired in the new FRC control system.

I want to make sure that everyone who wants to give input about the control system does.
This thread contains a link to an official FIRST survey that you can take to let FIRST know how you feel about the old control system and what needs to be improved upon in the new control system.

Not being directly involved with working on the control system when I was on a team, I can't really answer the questions on the survey. However, I want FIRST to get good results so they can make the best control system possible in the future. So please, programmers, electrical people, take a few minutes and take the survey and discuss the survey in that thread.

* Gets off soapbox *

[teekon]

-- What would be the pros and cons of having different languages like java and c++? I feel comfortable with just using c since thats all we have had so far and i dont really want to learn another language because then that puts me back this year. I think some upgrades on the motion board would be nice though! -- Teekon

I was also wondering if any one has tried programming their robot using LabView? -- Teekon

[Qbranch]

Originally Posted by teekon

-- What would be the pros and cons of having different languages like java and c++? I feel comfortable with just using c since thats all we have had so far and i dont really want to learn another language because then that puts me back this year. I think some upgrades on the motion board would be nice though! -- Teekon

I was also wondering if any one has tried programming their robot using LabView? -- Teekon

I think this might be going off track for this thread, but not sure what other related threads it might go with, so i'll just put it here...

I agree that its a good idea to stay with C... it works great for the application.

On your note about LabVIEW, I've used it before, its ok, but, its near impossible to document your code, EVERYTHING is passed by value, the 'code' (pictures) you make get really complicated to follow... but yes, i know the interaction it provides between various sensors, platforms and interfaces (the first thing i did with labVIEW in about 5 minutes from out of the box to application running was flip a switch hooked to a USBdaq, and it sends me an email saying "you hit the switch"), not to mention so simple its scary integration of extremely powerful vision processing.

Other than that, I can't see IFI/FIRST putting a processor big enough to run LabVIEW Embedded. It only runs on 32bit processors like Blackfins, mot PowerPCs, mot ColdFires, etc. While the cost IS comming down for big 32bit dsp-type processors, i don't think its cheap enough yet to happen.

Cool idea though...

-q

p.s. In the defense of lab view... imagine having ONE OF THESE for a coprocessor!!!!!

[Dung H Cao]

BREAKING NEWS!!!

Today at Kettering Kick-Off competition's LabView workshop, an un-official revelation was announced to all workshop attendees that the new FRC controller will be the NI CompactRIO platform (http://www.ni.com/pac/crio.htm) and programming will be via LabView.

The official announcement should be out in about two weeks. Details are being developed for training and support for FIRST teams.

[Kevin Sevcik]

I am.... skeptical of this. I just priced out a very basic cRIO system that would barely provide similar outputs to the current RC. It was ~$2500. This is sans some sort of radio system and operator interface, plus you'd still need speed controllers and relays for the motors. The current system from IFI costs less than $1200. It... just doesn't seem very sensible from where I'm sitting at the moment. Nevermind that I wouldn't particularly look forward to programming a robot in straight Labview unless they're giving us the Statechart module and a lot of other fancy add-ons.

[RyanN]

I'm very sure that the new system will not cost over $2500 for just the controller. Obviously there is a high price on this equipment, but the actual cost of production is probably only $200 at most. Same with the IFI controller. Everything at IFI that they sell us are way overpriced, but they monopolize what we can buy, so they can charge us anything they want. Just a rough estimate of a Victor 884. I would say at most $30 of raw materials, the rest is profit.
Actual Cost of IFI control system with parts purchases individually:
RC: 449.95
OI: 349.95
Victor 884: 114.95 * 4 = 458.80
Spike: 34.95 * 4 = 139.80
PWM Cables: 4.99 * 12? = 49.88
RC Radio: 149.95
OI Radio: 149.95

Total: 1748.28

I would estimate actual material cost to be under $200 for everything.

My .02

Also, please don't bash me for my estimate, I'm thinking of it all as just plastic, silicone, copper, and alluminum. Of course you have add in customer service, and everything else.

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

It was ~$2500. The current system from IFI costs less than $1200.

It's worth keeping in mind that the important number from FIRST's perspective isn't how much the system costs to a normal consumer, but rather how much it costs to FIRST. If we are in fact getting the cRIO, then it's safe to assume that NI is donating a good portion of the usual cost. Just hope that your students don't drop the thing once you've gotten it, though.

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

I wouldn't particularly look forward to programming a robot in straight Labview

Agreed. Though FIRST is about inspiration, and not technical learning, it's probably beneficial to use a language that students are likely to already know, and/or are likely to run into again in industry. BASIC, C, Java, and maybe even Python are all excellent examples... Labview isn't so much.

[artdutra04]

Last weekend I was driving by FIRST and I heard something about using 2,000 mailboxes in their latest control system.

You download code by sending it as an attachment (encoded in binary) to myrobot@new-uber-robot-controller-5000.ִ̣com, at which point an embedded speaker on the controller blurts out a "You've got Mail!" message load enough to be heard over even Blair and Grady on Einstein Field.

They've also pioneered a radical new power source for the controller, but that's still top secret until Krispy Kreme announces their new donut factory in Manchester, NH next week. But the most important thing to remember is that the new controller is not a big truck, that you just dump stuff on. It's a series of tubes.