IFI vs FTC? Both offering competitions for next year!

[Libby K]

I am reserving judgement on the IFI-vs-FTC decision until I see both in action, in person. However, I will say this;

I like the idea of choice and variety between competitions. My hope for the IFI competition is that it will stick to the goals and ideals of FIRST (the great things, like gracious professionalism and the concept of inspiring youth to follow career paths in science and technology) even without the FIRST platform.

I'm not sure 1923 as a robotics team will be able to do even one of these two great options because of funding, but I would love to be a part of both competitions in whatever way I can.

I sincerely hope that anyone who becomes involved in the IFI/VEX competitions does not leave FIRST; it would truly be a shame to see people go. But IFI has presented themselves well and gained a good following through FIRST and I'm looking forward to seeing their successes in the future.

My $0.02.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by David55

I am not a big fan of this idea only because they are doing it for profit. They realized that without the FTC cooperation (and all the money involved) the vex platform will become obsolete. I wouldn't say that the promotion of science and technology is the first thing on their priority list.

Are you serious?

I know from talking to people from IFI that their competitions will be CHEAPER. It will be cheaper to run the competition, and it will be cheaper to register for the competition. As accessible as FTC already was for teams, it should be even easier for schools to start teams and competitions, with VEX/IFI.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by basicxman

if they have a competiton next year in ontario ill do both because ive got 1K worth of vex sitting in my room and registration is free

but im sticking with FTC and the new platform for now

Just curious to why you, or anyone, would make a decision either way before we even know the full details of the new platform and Vex's competing competitions.

The way I see it is we have a known with Vex's hardware, and (for most of us) and unknown with their competition.
We have an unknown with FTC's hardware, but a known with their competition.
I won't weight the two against eachother, or directly compare at the moment, but I think if either side tries to pretend they are what they aren't it won't end pretty. Let's not start a Holy War and contend against eachother. Say what your platform can and can't do, don't try and say "we're better because of X,Y,Z." It won't end well.

[Beth Sweet]

Well, I'm glad to see a new opportunity. I know in MI, even if we want to, we can't do Tech, so the opportunity to do IFI may be a way to get more area schools involved in science/tech type things!

[talltree357]

Right now I am reserving my judgment until I see what the new cost and final format of FTC is for next year. I admit, I really enjoy having and designing with my Vex system right now and don't have a budget to invest in a second set up. I think many of us are sitting in the period of let's wait until the grand unveiling and see, is the cost worth it compared to staying with IFI and Vex. I just hope we find out the cost soon so I can make a decision and work on a budget for next year.

[Rick TYler]

Originally Posted by fredliu168

Initial thoughts:
1. Cost:
FIRST: $1000 for initial kit. 275$ registeration + 0-300$ regional registeration cost.
IFI: $299 for initial kit - most teams already have many parts so cost is 0$. Registeration fees were 0$ for BB, and are likely to remain lowish. Cost of event varies.

Yabbut... The average FIRST FTC team buys two starter kits, not one. With the $275 registration fee and $50 battery kit (something you leave out of your Vex comparison), most teams are spending at least $925 (with the FTC discount, thats more like $750) already. If you add in two more transmitters and batteries for another driver, you are over $1,000. If FIRST can provide a kit with enough parts to build a real competition robot (something the basic Vex kit does not) and registration for under $1,000, they are in the ball park. The Washington regional is free, so I don't include a regional fee. I also can't see anyone building a competitive tournament robot for much under $900-1,000 in Vex parts. Vex is great, but it ain't cheap.

3. Reliability:

FIRST: has the bad image of switching fields from 2005-2006, and changing platforms this year. Who knows if they decide to switch platforms again, or possibly ask teams to buy a new kit every year like in FRC.
IFI: will most likely upgrade their product, but will not likely remake their entire platform.

I don't what you mean by "reliability." You seem to be speaking to "will the technical platform ever change?," not reliability. I'm not sure what "bad habit" you are referring to. The real FVC/FTC program is just finishing its second year, and the 12x12 field hasn't changed. A little birdie tells me that FTC plans to stick with a 12x12 field (even though I would prefer an expansion to 12x16 or so, and moving the drivers to the ends like FRC).

5. Values and Principals:

FIRST: I really admire the way FIRST set up gracious professionalism and other principals and concepts. I think it is the most important part of FIRST because it gives you something you can take for the rest of your life, even if you are not doing engineering.
IFI: I admit I have not been to any events, and have no idea the ideals they bring to the table.


I would also like to point out that IFI robotics will be taking this competition to a global level.

Which means teams will get to meet other teams from different parts of the world and connect.

Are there really more IFI Robotics teams than international FRC and FLL teams?

IFI listens directly to the users? That gives it a big checkmark in my book.

As of now I have no idea which program I will be involved in. Both organizations have a lot of question marks. However I would like to point out that IFI certainly presented their program in a much better fashion then FIRST. Many teams will take this in consideration.

So, you don't trust anything FIRST says, but you believe everything in the IFI press release. You give full weight to all potentially positive aspects of IFI, but discount everything FIRST has been good at all these years. I think your decision must be right for you, but I doubt you've changed any minds.

[EricVanWyk]

Can somebody _please_ link me to this $1000 number? I can't find reference to it anywhere official.

[fredliu168]

Originally Posted by Rick TYler

Yabbut... The average FIRST FTC team buys two starter kits, not one. With the $275 registration fee and $50 battery kit (something you leave out of your Vex comparison), most teams are spending at least $925 (with the FTC discount, thats more like $750) already. If you add in two more transmitters and batteries for another driver, you are over $1,000. If FIRST can provide a kit with enough parts to build a real competition robot (something the basic Vex kit does not) and registration for under $1,000, they are in the ball park. The Washington regional is free, so I don't include a regional fee. I also can't see anyone building a competitive tournament robot for much under $900-1,000 in Vex parts. Vex is great, but it ain't cheap.

How do you know the average team buys two starter kits? Did you do a survey of teams?
I know several teams that purchased a starter kit in their first year along with battery and built up this year by purchasing additional parts. This means they spent around $350 per year in parts. If they were to do IFI, they may need to spend around $300 on additional parts for next year to continue the program. For FTC they would need to spend $1000 not to mention registeration on the mysterious starter kit.
I'm not sure exactly what is contained in the starter kit for FTC so I cannot say if this is a good deal or not. However, many teams who invested a great deal of money on creating several teams (I'm thinking of woburn who competed with 8 teams in Ontario ) to teach students with a fun competition now cannot make nearly as many FTC teams.

I don't what you mean by "reliability." You seem to be speaking to "will the technical platform ever change?," not reliability. I'm not sure what "bad habit" you are referring to. The real FVC/FTC program is just finishing its second year, and the 12x12 field hasn't changed. A little birdie tells me that FTC plans to stick with a 12x12 field (even though I would prefer an expansion to 12x16 or so, and moving the drivers to the ends like FRC).

When I said reliability, I meant reliablility of the platform for the organization. Perhaps I could have worded it better, but my point is valid.
Also, technically either FTC is in its first year or third/fourth year. In the first/second pilot years the field is different from its 2006 pilot year and its current field.

Are there really more IFI Robotics teams than international FRC and FLL teams?



So, you don't trust anything FIRST says, but you believe everything in the IFI press release. You give full weight to all potentially positive aspects of IFI, but discount everything FIRST has been good at all these years. I think your decision must be right for you, but I doubt you've changed any minds.

Obviously there are not more IFI robotics teams than FLL teams. I do believe IFI international teams have already exceeded FIRST in FRC and FTC in just its first year. FLL has had many years to grow (not sure the exact number).

Also, why would you say I don't trust anything FIRST says ? I may have missed this somewhere, but did FIRST say this kit was permanant or going to be for at least X years? My other points are based on what was said by FIRST (approximate $1000 kit cost). I really like the FIRST organization and what it stands for. I just really don't like how they handled the situation so far.

I think my points are probably agreed upon by many teams doing FTC now. I am not a spokesperson for IFI nor do I pretend to be. I believe I also stated I have not chosen which platform to go with. My points supported IFI mainly because FIRST has left us in the dark in many places. My opinions can definitely change once I see the kit and the costs associated with it. That is why I said this is "my initial thoughts".

It's good to be objective, and I merely wanted to point out my thoughts.

[ManicMechanic]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Just curious to why you, or anyone, would make a decision either way before we even know the full details of the new platform and Vex's competing competitions.

If our team were just graduating out of FLL, it would be a tough call, but the fact that we have $1K+ of Vex equipment biases us heavily in the Vex direction. That initial kit was hard to come by -- one kid basically gave up a robotics camp opportunity and diverted the funds into Vex equipment for the school.

On an annual budget of about $500, having a low registration fee is a big plus for us, and expanding our team of 7 students (and growing) into 2 teams actually looks practical for next year (much needed, as 70 fingers tend to get in each others' way ) Money isn't the only consideration, but it's an important one for a low-budget team, and Vex has the potential to deliver a reasonable experience for considerably less.

Beyond IFI's "official" events, the lower cost also will allow us to increase exposure to robotics in our area: 2 other local Vex teams plan to expand in the same way as ours, and we are looking to form 10 teams from the 3 and hold local events. Being able to hold low-cost events locally, we're more likely to snag neighborhood spectators and pick up even more teams.

We wish FTC well and hope that it gets quality teams to continue doing what it does best. Who knows, if we get more money and the students are itching for a change, we may be back.

[Daviddavid]

[quote=Lil' Lavery;722818]The way I see it is we have a known with Vex's hardware, and (for most of us) and unknown with their competition.
We have an unknown with FTC's hardware, but a known with their competition.
I QUOTE]

Two different people I talked to today about all this at the Davis event said to me that it's cool they don't have to worry about Vex being able to run great events. I said I it's one thing to expect a good program but there's really no way to know until we see how the World event in May goes. But they said - you don't know the people at IFI, they got people who have been running these events for years and they know how to do it as good or better than anyone. So at least for them, they feel totally confident that the new Vex program has a great platform and will have a great program with good competitions.
I'm assuming this is true, at least I hope it is, and it does sound like another reason to be excited or hopeful about the new Vex competitions. I kind of thought it might take them a year or two to learn how to run events like I was at today, but it sounds like they already have lots of experience doing it. I thought that was interesting, but maybe I'm reading to much into it.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Daviddavid

Two different people I talked to today about all this at the Davis event said to me that it's cool they don't have to worry about Vex being able to run great events. I said I it's one thing to expect a good program but there's really no way to know until we see how the World event in May goes. But they said - you don't know the people at IFI, they got people who have been running these events for years and they know how to do it as good or better than anyone. So at least for them, they feel totally confident that the new Vex program has a great platform and will have a great program with good competitions.
I'm assuming this is true, at least I hope it is, and it does sound like another reason to be excited or hopeful about the new Vex competitions. I kind of thought it might take them a year or two to learn how to run events like I was at today, but it sounds like they already have lots of experience doing it. I thought that was interesting, but maybe I'm reading to much into it.

By no means am I saying IFI will do a poor job running events. In fact, I'd tend to lean towards the side that they would do an awesome job. They do have two people with FRC GDC experience within their ranks (Tony Norman and Jason Morella), and a number of others with experience in running competitions, teams, and other events. But the bottom line is that we haven't really seen their event(s) yet, and we don't know how the whole system will be set up next year. Until we see some more information, I'm still chucking that up there as a question mark, although I'm very hopeful and confident that it will turn out well.

[Rick TYler]

Originally Posted by fredliu168

How do you know the average team buys two starter kits? Did you do a survey of teams?

I haven't done a survey, but I know people who have the data. I got it by asking someone at FIRST "how many kits does the typical FIRST FTC team buy on the discount program." Having watched our club build five very competitive FVC/FTC robots, I will add that you could build a robot from the basic kit, but it is unlikely to be competitive. With the SDK at $100, I don't see how you can field a team for $350. Do they use the base code?

I figure the basic cost to be $300 for a kit, $70-100 for batteries, at least $100 for additional parts and sensors, $100 for the SDK, extra transmitter $130. That's $700-730. If my contact at FIRST is right (they were) FTC teams buy a second starter kit, which means you might not need the extra transmitter, so let's say it's $170 more (since IFI won't give you the FIRST discount) for a total of $900. The $300 competition robot simply isn't possible, if you want the robot to be something other than a BLT.

I know that we spent over $1,000 last year to field two robots, and dropped another $2,000 this year to field three and build one more as a test mule. Owning $3,000 worth of Vex parts makes it pretty certain we will participate in the IFI program along with FTC.

Of course, our club visited the Seattle Regional this week and they all have the FRC bug now. May God have mercy on our souls...

[Gdeaver]

Our team, team 104 will most likely not field a FRC team next year. 104 was a joint team of 3 high schools. Hopefully there will be a resurrection of 3 VEX/FTC teams. One from each high school as an after school program with occasional meetings with outside mentors. This whole split is going to cause problems. The way information is being released, there is a good chance that we will not be able to make a choice until the summer. My experience is that when dealing with schools you better have you plan done before June. It's difficult to get anything done in the summer and other programs will have already grabbed the cash. It would be in the the best interest of IFI, First and everyone else to spit out the specific info now. That way teams can make their choice and develop a preliminary plan before June.

I believe both IFI and First have missed an important opportunity to get these programs into the school. It has to do with the robot controller. The robot controllers as they are now are only good for robots. If the developers had expanded the platform a little more the controllers could also be data loggers and would then be usable in the class room. Our school district has equipment that is basically repackaged NI devices and a lab curriculum. If NI had the foresight to unify the new robot controller and their lab equipment the FTC would be a no brainier. One could get a school district to by the brains and sensors for the class room. Then all that would be needed for the robot is some metal, gears and motors. The program would be an easy sell.
It's not to late. With the NTX's communication ports NI could make this work.
We have classes were the teachers are not up to date having students do primitive experiments and graph the data by hand. Using a TI calculator system is not much better. With a choice of bring lab instrumentation in to the class room or running a FTC program, I would pick the class room and admin. will to. If they are the same it's a no brainier for the school admin. Our school district will be buying thousands of dollars of lab equipment this year. To bad our robot program can't be integrated into that budget. Does any body else see the value of integration?

[Ben Mitchell]

I am not working for either FIRST or IFI, so all this is strictly me.

First off, my thoughts on the Vex platform can be found via this link:

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=65701

Secondly, and ( I think more importantly to this discussion)

The "FIRST versus IFI" mentality is WRONG.

Let me state this again:

It is WRONG to say that IFI and FIRST are in competition. The title of this thread is a misnomer.

Go to the FIRST web site: look at the mission statement of FIRST. Actually, I'll even reprint it here:

"Our mission is to inspire young people to be science and technology leaders, by engaging them in exciting mentor-based programs that build science, engineering and technology skills, that inspire innovation, and that foster well-rounded life capabilities including self-confidence, communication and leadership."

Now, tell me how IFI's robotics program doesn't satisfy this mission? What is important here is what is being produced: the Vex platform is something a lot of people have invested a lot of money in thus far - it is something schools can afford and teachers can use in the classroom. It is a known quantity. It is an educational tool that people have already invested in, and it WORKS. Why is it bad that someone has begun a new competition which uses this tool? If IFI didn’t do it, someone would have. I would have. I already have a game and field designed and built.

This new FTC platform is an unknown variable. But that does not mean it won't work or is inherently bad. I think that the new FTC platform will be more akin to a "mini FRC" program rather than something completely different. Perhaps the new FTC will be the program FIRST administration wanted it to be, and Vex/IFI's competition can be a discrete entity with its own advantages and disadvantages. One is not better than the other: they best serve students in different situations.

The two should not be considered in competition: why can't schools do both? No one needs to pick just one. Both are tools, like anything else, and people will use the one that works the best. FIRST the organization and IFI the organization are irrelevant details in satisfying the educational and ideological purpose for which these programs can be used.

The "Us Versus Them" and "IFI is for profit" mentality is harmful and unproductive: what is important is the end goal of the program, and IFI's program and the founding vision of FIRST share the same overarching goals. Everyone should be on the same team, even if the uniforms might be different. I’m looking forward to the new IFI game and I’m interested in having more concrete information about the FTC platform. The two are not mutually exclusive.

As a side note: I doubt IFI will be making much money from their competition: they make that selling Vex parts. I suspect the IFI events will be much cheaper than FIRST registration because of this. It makes business sense and the students still benefit. No one loses just because a business is involved. I think their products are reasonably priced and by nature are scalable for schools and other programs to build a robotics program, if not in one shot, than over some time.Scalability is key here, as is accessability, as I've expounded on in my six page monster of a post.

That being said, I think Vex is too good of a product and educational tool to abandon at the snap of the fingers, and I think those of you that are trying to bash IFI for having their own robotics competition really need to take a step back and realize what you are doing here. FIRST should not be able promoting FIRST at the exclusion of all other programs. FIRST is about the inspiration and recognition of science and technology. Whether or not that inspiration comes from FIRST is absolutely irreverent.

I think Edward R. Murrow stated it very eloquently when he said in a 1958 speech:

" This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires and lights in a box."

He was talking, of course, about television, but his message just as easily can apply to any medium, including this one. What you put into the program is what you get out of it.

The medium is NOT the message.

[IndySam]

I don't understand why there has to be a IFI vs FTC battle. Each has their own strengths and weaknesses, why do we need to decide which is better?

Here in Indiana we have great Vex program thanks in no small part to the efforts of Dan Ward. The one kit competitions have been a great success.

FTC is a great rout for programs that don't have the budget or other resources for FRC.

Each is a great training ground for new students joining an FRC team

We haven't mentioned other programs like BEST who have their own strengths.

I know FRC teams who use one or a couple of these competing programs for pre-season FRC training with great success.

Can't we just all get along.