White Box Robotics Pre-order

Excellent post, David. Thanks.

As lurkers: David doesn't post here frequently, and it's nice to have his input. If you're not familiar with his work, follow the link at the bottom of his message. Several of David's robots, like NBot and SR04, are considered classics.

Come to think of it, NBot probably inspired a significant number of people to create their own two-wheeled self-balancing robot. And it wasn't even in a Star Wars movie!

-- Gordon

David, I just love your symphonies of robotic designs.

The NBot would have to be the favorite.

-- John

snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote in news:1115536830.590192.148140 @g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

"Frontline announced its acquisition of White Box on May 10."

It is easy to say you think someone's ideas or opinions are "poorly considered," but without an explanation as to why, the statement doesn't count. This is something on this newsgroup that amazes me. No one seems to ever support what they say with any fact or argument.

If I say you are a 12' tall gorrilla without any basis what so ever, it would be a meaningless statement. A mere disagreement about something does not mean that something is "poorly considered." You have to understand why there is a disagreement.

If I backed down every time people disagreed with me, I would never have accomplished anything in my life.

It is OK to disagree with someone, is it not? You and I may disagree, and we may both think each other wrong, but more often than not two seemingly opposing positions can both have merrit given different perspectives. It is not clear that either side of a disagreement is "misinformed" without any clear evidence.

What does a microcontroller cost? That is the question. There is unit cost. There is the cost of any tools required. There is a cost involved with integrating it into your design (communications, power, etc.). There is also a psychological cost of dividing development across dissimilar platforms.

From my perspective, the cost is too high.

The tone in which I write is based on years of writing whitepapers, documentation, and business proposals, and is the *only* way to write about a subject. One does not write a technical document in a wishy washy "I'm writing this but don't really know what I'm doing," tone. So you don't like my tone, or feel challened by it? I'm sorry, that's your own problem and you'll have to cope with it on your own time.

As for "expert," no one on usenet is an expert. All statements should be met with skeptisism and checked for accuracy. Challenge the poster with facts and reason if they are incorrect.

I would say that at least I provide support for my arguments, the reasons behind what I say.

And you think that is a reasonable way to behave?

Oh yes they are and you know it.

No, but when I've had the nerve, the nerve! to say I don't need micro-controllers, what was the response?

I don't mind abrasive, just not personal. Only in the last few posts have I allowed myself to get personal and I don't like it.

yea, but I'm stubborn too.

I do appreciate the backgrounder. Always helpful. Since day one you've used a handle, and even your new Web page doesn't say who you are. Only by looking you up in whois is it possible to even find out your name. You can't say you've been open about who you are, or what you've done.

In any case, my work in this field is more than two books. I've written

5 or 6. I've edited a series of robot books, I've contributed regular columns on robotics to four different magazines, I've written professionally on the subject in publications since 1983. For 3 1/2 years I worked for a firm in Hollywood developing automation systems for film handling equipment, and for the last three years I've run my own part-time robotics company, specializing in low-cost components for students and teachers. None of this has been my full-time job. I'm currently a consultant to Technicolor, exploring digital cinema technologies and markets.

But my expertise doesn't matter here, it's the one you'd like people to think you have for ALL aspects of this field. It's the way you come across. My particular objection which you quoted was your assetions about markets. I see little in your background to suggest you're an expert here, or by inference, that marketing is so simple anyone can figure it out without the need to do actual research. I am not the one who has concluded this or that about the robotics marketing, which is ever-changing in any case.

Maybe you don't use enough IMOs. I don't know. But you come across as a braggart who tends to express his ideas like a bull in a china closet. This is not to say you don't have good ideas. I think you do. It is merely the style in which you present those ideas, and like it or not, HOW you come across is as important as WHAT you have to say. This is just my opinion, of course, but juding by the other responses, I don't think it's an isolated one.

Reply if you must, but frankly, I don't have the interest to keep arguing with you, and you're free to have the last word. I'd rather build robots.

-- Gordon

Ya know, if'n I'da thought this might've been a flame war, I would never'd relayed the information.

Personally, I thought it was a good idea--from the perspective that I've spent _thousands_ of dollars over the years pursuing this _hobby_.

I'm not a mechanically inclined indivdual, nor do I intend to be, however tempting. I can barely burn my own circuit boards. I am, however, interested in all facets of "the field".

I like the fact that I can get something that goes fast and looks cool.

Bugger all of you that have made me feel guilty over the last two days for posting this.

I, personally, thank you for bringing this to the attention of the group.

I have spent a great deal also.

Strangely enough I'm fairly good at electronics and not so good at mechanics, yet I prefer to deal with the mechanics.

Me too.

If White Box had been selling product six months ago I would have bought one.

*Nobody* can make you feel guilty. And frankly it seems that it's mainly one person that appears to be personally insulted by the White Box offerings.

-- D. Jay Newman

What Jay said.

And besides, Whitebox and Frontline have now merged, creating an interesting hybrid robotics company. Quite obviously, at least one outfit saw (sees) the benefit of the Whitebox approach...so much so that they put up $$$ for the whole thing.

-- Gordon

I wonder who is the broker of this merger? If there is one. Also, what about Robodynamics and Coroware? That is another merger of similar kind. Will the White Box Robot be as successful as the roomba? Probbably not. Will it sell better than the ER-1 of Evolution Robotics? We certainly hope so.

Good questions. Given both Frontline and Whitebox are fairly small companies -- maybe a dozen employees between them -- I have a feeling there was no broker setting up the deal. Just my hunch, though. Company CEOs in this biz tend to know each other.

I think we'll see some more mergers, as there may be too many companies out there right now vying for the same dollars. RoboDynamics/CoroWare is basically in the same business as Frontline, as well as a few others. I think we'll start seeing some real competition to iRobot, perhaps from the Japanese, who have so far not competed heavily in warfare and civil control applications. Lifestyle support technologies may be where the Japanese pull ahead. That seems a better fit in their culture, IMO.

We need to remember that the ER-1 was produced as a development platform, designed to promote their software. While some hobbyists purchased an ER-1, the robots themselves were basically sold at cost -- down to around $250 for a while -- with an eye on selling licenses to the vision and navigation IP. There seems to be some success there, with licenses to Sharper Image, Sony, Whitebox, etc.

-- Gordon

Robotics?

Company

companies

RoboDynamics/CoroWare

At this point, the White Box Robot is basically an ER-1 in a better looking box. Unless they managed to upgrade the software with ERSP or something more advanced and powerful, otherwise this robot will probably remain on the shelf. Don't know if packaging an ER-1 in a good looking box constitute as a uniquely competitive feature. If this is indeed a good strategy, what will prevent another robotic box designer from designing an even better looking box as an enclosure. The obvious problem with White Box Robot when compare to the ER-1 is that it greatly simplifies and limits ways user mounts components on to the robot. This is a plus and a minus. The plus, because user no longer need to be creative in coming up with mounting options. The minus, once fully configured, everybody's finished robot will likely to be very similar, appearance-wise.

It is not altogether wise to be plastered over the internet. It is not intended for mystery.

OK.

As I said in another post, marketing is *always* opinion regardless of how much data you collect. Even when marketing reports are accurate, they can be very wrong.

However, as a point of reference, one company with which I have an affiliation and I have been studying the hobby robotics and computer experimenter market for over a decade. I have been trying to get a small self-contained digital I/O interface system (and software) on the market for at least 10 years. I'll spare you the details, but it is aimed at very low cost and a pretty box and truly easy user interface. I know it may sound like nothing big, but software is a BIG part of it, and some of the early surveys of educators and professionals show a real interest.

We all like the idea, but unless we can get some investment, we are better off working on the gigs that pay directly. To get investment, you need to clearly understand and can target the market, and try as I might, I have not been able to see a market place -- at least not in the volume or reachability as required.

So, even though it should only cost $39.99 and come with a CD, there is no way I or my buddies can sell it for less than $200, and that is clearly out of range with what we see as the market.

Anyway, my point is I have a bit of experience in the marketing realm, both in my own endevours and in previous companies at which I've been employed. I've been a private consultant for about 4 years now, and before that I was the CTO at a dotcom that (of course) failed, not becauase of the technology, we accomplished everything we set out to do, but because the marketing wasn't done to verify that our objectives were correct. It is a mistake I care not make again, I lost a lot of time and money.

Even so, as I've said, there are no experts on usenet. Everyone is both a genius and an idiot. Verify the facts if you are interested in the topic.

This is something else I have to take issue with. You have written professionally. I have been published myself, perhaps not to the extent as you, but whatever. I also write business proposals, patent descriptions, internal documentation, white papers, etc. You do not write from a perspective that you don't know, you write from a position of confidence.

If, in a business proposal, you tend to express things as "maybe," "i'm not sure," "in my opinion," or etc, you'd never get business. If you're wishy washy on a subject, why write about it at all? If you are wishy washy on a subject, why should anyone read what you write?

So, you write solid text based on what you know. If a person disagrees or can find factual inaccuracies, then you discuss the issues and if there are indeed factual inaccuracies, you correct them. While there should never be anything factually inaccuracte as you should understand and research what you are writing about, we are all human and sometimes mistakes are made.

My dad's expression was "bull in a china shop," but I digress.

I'm not sure why you guys have a problem, maybe it is a usenet thing. I have written, what I think at least, are a few pretty interesting posts based on a good deal of experience in dealing with hard timing constraints on non-real time operating systems. I had written them in a way that one would see in any corporate whitepaper or internet HOWTO. Because I didn't use IMHO or whatever, you get sour?

I guess my problem, if indeed it is a problem at all, is that I disregard unsupported statements. If someone writes something, I want to see some theory or facts supporting it. Maybe it is the bad habit of an engineer, but while I does have the tendency to ruffle feathers, it has served me well professionally, and quite frankly, have come to expect the same quality in other engineers.

Actually, that's why I took so long in responding. I have upgraded my robot to the 2.6 kernel and have to do some rewrites. Those are pretty much done, hense the reply.

Gordon McComb wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@NOgmccombSPAM.com:

Robotics?

feeling

companies

RoboDynamics/CoroWare

I attempted to purchase an ER-1 and was told they are NLA. So I contacted the company, offering to be there end of product life support company. I got no response. Bummer.

Joe