How much would you pay for a robot?

What computer does it have?

Does it come with software?  Is
it a devlopment "base" or a finished
product?

If everything is put together well,
I'd pay $1000.

motors 100
base/chassis 50
motor control 100
cameras 100
lcd display 100
battery charger 100
battery 100
I/O electronics 100
kbd/mouse  50


there's my .02 * 50000

Rich

aiiadict@gmail.com wrote:


I would use a mini or nano ITX board, but have slots for three more.


It would come pre-loaded and ready to boot. Manual control and a good usable
set of libraries.


What would a "finished product" be in this context?


Hmm, that doesn't allow much overhead.

At this point, with my current income,
$1500 would be the top price I would pay
and I would have to be very impressed
with the design.

Rich

aiiadict@gmail.com wrote:


As I've been corresponding on this board, it has been crossing my mind, "I
wonder if I can sell any of this?" (About the things I am doing)

Just a curiosity, but if I could bring about such a system for $500~$1000
you think you would by it? :)

mlw wrote:

one)

And what degree of expertise would be required in electronics
and programming to use the above using what language and what OS?

I think for a simple robot to do your mail delivery idea the
above is a major overkill. Like using a bulldozer to plant a daisy :)
I think Rich does something like that already using his clunky Apple
computer, sonar and 128k memory Basic and assembler.


John

Clunky? :-)

hah.

I put about $200 into it, but nobody would ever buy it.

It is a nice pet though.  It makes family and friends
say OOOOH  and Ahhhh, and robotics and CS people
say "Why?" and "you are wasting your talents"

Rich

aiiadict@gmail.com wrote:

You just have to get with the program Rich and buy a PC :)

Did you know that a modern PC can run a Basic interpreter
program faster than an assembler version on the old machines?


John

I have all of my software running in C on the PC.  It
is unimpressive to me.  Yes, an interpreter is faster
on a PC than assembly on 1mhz 6502.

A robotics friend is converting my C into windows
c++ with nice GUI.  

Rich

Does anyone know where I could get a remote robot with stereo vision?
Just one that you could run from a PC?  Is this pretty advanced at the
moment?  I wouldn't think it would be too hard to create.  Has anone
done so?  I checked out those cye robots but they're over 2 grand and
only have one camera.  They're demo is pretty sweet though.

JGCASEY wrote:


I was thinking Linux (That should be obvious to anyone who's read any of my
posts :-)

It should boot up, and run out of the box. A joystick application with
video.

The AI is up to you.


A really big daisy :-)

Seriously, as an experimental platform, or even your home computer, I guess.

mlw wrote:

You know a lot of nifty robots have no OS. Some years ago someone
had a little robot that used vision to run out and collect tennis
balls. It think he wrote up an article on it for the Seattle ENCODER.



Darn, I knew there would be a catch :)

It reminds me of the old sales ploy of "it is only limited by
your imagination". What a terrible limitation, it really made
their product useless.



:)

JGCASEY wrote:

I'm new to robotics and have been looking into a system like this so I
can get into computer vision without spending the time on putting my
own robot together.  Though it would be cool, I don't have the time
right now.  I've been looking at the <a
href="http://www.evolution.com/er1/">ER1</a>  from Evolution for 700
bucks.  It seems to offer a lot of the same stuff that yours does.
Yours may not have a bunch of ready computer vision software, the sleek
looks, or a gripper, but you don't require a laptop.

I'm new to robotics, but I think it would be cooler, if you didn't
include the mounted computers on the robot.  If you just used a
microcontroller and the wireless connection, wouldn't it be possible to
run everything remotely?  This would save power and space on the robot
and would probably cost a lot less as well.  I'd pay $500+ for a system
like that.


JGCASEY wrote:

Cool idea, but with 4 computers processing away youd need about 10 amps
minimum, plus ancillaries, plus motors.  to have a 30-40 pound payload
youd need some largish motors.  I could see a battery lasting maybe a
half hour at most without being so large that your payload would be
reduced dramatically, or youd need bigger motors, which in turn draws
more current.

But...for soemthing like that in a semi-finished form, that could do all
that's said...hmm..maybe 500-800 dollars.

If you used embedded linux, you could get away with alot more with less
power consumption and space, but the boards are a tad spensive, which
would up the price.

I'm new to robotics and have been looking into a system like this so I
can get into computer vision without spending the time on putting my
own robot together.  Though it would be cool, I don't have the time
right now.  I've been looking at the ER1 from Evolution for 700
bucks. (http://www.evolution.com/er1/ ) It seems to offer a lot of the
same stuff that yours does.
Yours may not have a bunch of ready computer vision software, the sleek

looks, or a gripper, but you don't require a laptop.


I'm new to robotics, but I think it would be cooler, if you didn't
include the mounted computers on the robot.  If you just used a
microcontroller and the wireless connection, wouldn't it be possible to

run everything remotely?  This would save power and space on the robot
and would probably cost a lot less as well.  I'd pay $500+ for a system

like that.

godavemon wrote:
godavemon wrote:

 http://www.evolution.com/er1/

Yes I think that makes sense and have said as
much in previous posts. Why not use the cheap
power of a modern computer and take the weight
of the mobile part.

Wireless keyboards, mice, screens, internet
connection is common place why not a wireless
robot base?

Have you seen cybert?

http://www.pioneernet.net/johnc/cybert.htm

It would probably cost somewhere between $500 and $1000 to put that
together on the retail market, assuming, of course, your time is worthless.


Since it doesn't really do anything, not even that much. ;-)

    Mark

Mark VandeWettering wrote:


Well, what does it need to do?

Mark VandeWettering wrote:

  I agree that the "A.I. is up to you" being a problem.

  In my mind, the most reasonable thing you can pre-package the robot
to do is be a vacuum cleaner.  Essentially a hackable and expandable
roomba.

Joe Dunfee