Powered up hints, tips and requests thread

[HectorMB]

For me, TLG in terms of everything related to programming is a dead end. It's a real pity that they end like that, but as you pointed out, it's just impossible to move forward. The retirement of the Mindstorms line was just the signal to move into Pybricks. They're still limitations, but it way better way to program your stuff. 

[Andman]

@recklessGlitch, long overdue official basic documentation for the code blocks of the powered up app:

https://www.lego.com/en-us/service/help/Power_Functions/LEGO-Powered-Up-programming-blocks-kA06N000000g04eSAA

The website doesn't seem to show all of them, but there is a link the a pdf file with possibly more explained blocks.

https://www.lego.com/cdn/cs/service/assets/blt5e2546716d484ba8/PoweredUp-ProgrammingBlocks.pdf

@kbalage, any chance that you can update your guide with the new code block design?

Source was the following video (not my channel/content): https://youtu.be/SY6RCxOAC78

[kbalage]

@Andman honestly I don't know at this point. LEGO has published their own guide, and it seems to be, shall we say, "inspired" by my version, because I found some descriptions that match 100%. I have mixed feelings about this, and I'm not sure if I want to do uncredited free work for the company going forward. 

[recklessGlitch]

@kbalage It's such a shamefull thing - again!
TLG didnt manage to do a documentation for 4 years and then finally they do one by ripping you off?
And that "documentation" is a pdf document exported from Mircosoft Word (the filename says so, they didn't even manage to change that)
The images look like screenshots made directly from the powered up app. Sometimes they are even blury because of a low resolution. They made the app so they should have the original coding block texture assets, no? Probably even as vector graphics.
And they use your texts without even asking? You made them up after contacting the LEGO support, if I remember correctly. And these texts were super cool when YOU provided them but they are far from perfect. There are some blocks that I just don't understand what they do from the description (sorry, it helped a lot though)
TLG should be more accurate, understandable. It's their bloody software, they should know how it works, no?
 And they should tell us even more, like which motors work with which coding blocks (Moto speed doesnt work with medium linear motos for example.)
What a speed or power of 100 means, etc...  

What a lousy backyard trash toy facility is LEGO? Oh just the biggest Toy corporation on the damn planet, right?
Obviously TLG is run by a bunch of greedy scum bag capitalists, who don't give a crap on hiring people who know what they do and how to produce user friendly.
No, judging from the app they hire Amateurs. The coding blocks are "explained" by unreadable, unclear and much too small hieroglyphs in the new coding block design. The app design is rediculous - some interface elemets are so small, I not only have difficulty to read them, but to touch them, and my fingers are rather small!  Amateur mistakes!!! There are databases on button sizes or Icon sizes from Google and Apple. Any proper app designer knows that.
But no, obviously TLG hires mediocre programmers and amateur graphics designers with no education in interface design or user experience design and probably keep staff to a minimum with no experts, but a bunch of interns researching farting sounds for the powered up app.
I would be so embarrassed if I owned TLG.

I wonder if you could sue them for IP infringement, since they did use your intellectual property.

Edited August 23, 2023 by recklessGlitch

[Toastie]

18 hours ago, recklessGlitch said:

Obviously TLG is run by a bunch of greedy scum bag capitalists

OK, I have to admit, I read your post with some - no with a lot of joy. But I would rephrase that piece of text as follows:

Obviously TLG is run by a bunch of greedy scum bag capitalists. 

Why? "Obviously" becomes obsolete, as "greedy" + "capitalist" is like a "black rap". "scum bag" is well, again a black rap in this context ...

Other than that: Yes. I agree.

Don't know about IP infringement rights in this case, the internet is essentially "open source", I do know though how low, how very low TLG's approach on this documentation really is.

@kbalage: Your website was so much better. In every regard.

Best,
Thorsten

Edited August 23, 2023 by Toastie

[kbalage]

I have no intention of taking any steps regarding their guide, I made mine to help the community. At the time I used a draft as a basis that was sent to me by LEGO customer service, but I also made that clear on my website. If TLG had done the same, that would have been perfectly fine.

I don't think TLG employees should be criticized for their skills. I see two problems: first, the overall concept of Powered Up, which still relies heavily on programming skills without providing comprehensive resources to learn and understand the system, and second, the severe lack of resources dedicated to Powered Up development over the years.

[allanp]

44 minutes ago, kbalage said:

I have no intention of taking any steps regarding their guide, I made mine to help the community. At the time I used a draft as a basis that was sent to me by LEGO customer service, but I also made that clear on my website. If TLG had done the same, that would have been perfectly fine.

I don't think TLG employees should be criticized for their skills. I see two problems: first, the overall concept of Powered Up, which still relies heavily on programming skills without providing comprehensive resources to learn and understand the system, and second, the severe lack of resources dedicated to Powered Up development over the years.

From someone on the outside looking in, this feels most accurate. It's not that they can't do it, they just haven't. The resources you mentioned are surely human right? These things aren't being developed by AI as far as I know. Is the team they have working on it really really small? It feels like they are drip feeding us with not very much happening, like the individual members of the team could be very talented, but they need more talent in the form of more members on the team? It seems an odd choice not to hire more talent when it is available (I can even recommend someone if they want!) and not doing so is having a detrimental impact on their product. 

I also agree with your concerns over the reliance on programming in PU. Lack of documentation is of course problematic, but there's also many that just don't want to program even if they did have full documentation, and would prefer a system that can be as simple as PF with separate battery boxes and receivers, while there are others that, now they have tasted from the tree of PU, would see it as a regression if they went back to PF. My "lets fix powered up" thread is an attempt find a solution to this, but it is very difficult to even come up with the right concept before it's even designed and prototyped, so I certainly have some sympathy for TLGs current position, but I think I might have hit on the solution, probably.

Edited August 24, 2023 by allanp

[Wimmer]

Lego US site is heavily discounting the 88009 hub ?…

I like that alright, but are they maybe discontinuing this hub ? Or replacing it with something better/newer ?

Anyone have an idea about why they doing this for the second time in slightly over a month ?

From $50 to now $35 ?…

🤨

[allanp]

On 12/27/2024 at 1:31 AM, Wimmer said:

Lego US site is heavily discounting the 88009 hub ?…

I like that alright, but are they maybe discontinuing this hub ? Or replacing it with something better/newer ?

Anyone have an idea about why they doing this for the second time in slightly over a month ?

From $50 to now $35 ?…

🤨

There's been a feeling for a while now that PU is being either replaced with the next system or at the very least it's being completely overhauled. There's no concrete proof of this though, only small pointers towards this, like the lack of PU in sets recently as well as selling PU parts off at a discount, or not producing enough to have them in stock.

There's something about this years flagship mercedes also, although very competently well engineered, it doesn't feel like it was meant to be a flagship imho. It just lacks a sense of flagship sized scale and ambition and was essentially a simplified 42110. A flagship doesn't solve the problems of the past by removing features, nor is it confined to only 2 new pieces. It's well made, but a flagship? I think it's unfair to place the weight of that title onto it TBH. Combined with the delay of the Liebherr crane also, maybe I'm adding 2 and 2 and getting 43, but it feels like PU promised more than it could deliver, or just wasn't well liked, and has had to be replaced or revamped much sooner than they had planned.

I'm hoping for some 2025 Technic flagship information real soon, maybe we'll get some insite into the future of powered Technic sets. 

[M_longer]

I hope that Control+ will die and LEGO will introduce something with physical remotes again.

[SNIPE]

What would be the best way to connect 2 motors to 1 hub output port, say from a buwizz 3.0. Preferably where the motors can, in hardware, be set to rotate both in the same direction or in opposing directions. If the pole reversing is done in software as well, then it would override the hardwares pole reverser.

I checked some third party options such as a Y cable or a 3 input port replicator, but the port replicator has a fixed 50cm cable and both the Y cable and port replicator don't have pole reversers

[idlemarvel]

I note the Powered Up app has been updated (sometime around December 24) to version 4.1.1 (16059).

Lego say it provides minor bug fixes and performance improvements.

I haven't had much chance to try it out yet but I haven't noticed anything different so far. 

Does anyone know if it supports the new Technic Move hub/motor/lights? I have one but I won't get a chance to test it until the weekend.

Anyway good to know the app is still being updated.

[Mantarri]

Need some motor advice.

I'm working on putting together the Liebherr excavator from my collection, but I don't have any PU XL motors. I've got 4 L, and 4 Medium Angular (from the PU Mindstorms set.) From my understanding, the Medium Angular motors definitely can't sub for PU XL motors. But I've also heard the XL motors aren't really different from the L motors, so I'd like to get motors that are more than just "L but a bit bulkier." I was looking at the Large Angular motors, but I'm not sure if they'd be powerful enough for the Liebherr.

[howitzer]

10 hours ago, Mantarri said:

Need some motor advice.

I'm working on putting together the Liebherr excavator from my collection, but I don't have any PU XL motors. I've got 4 L, and 4 Medium Angular (from the PU Mindstorms set.) From my understanding, the Medium Angular motors definitely can't sub for PU XL motors. But I've also heard the XL motors aren't really different from the L motors, so I'd like to get motors that are more than just "L but a bit bulkier." I was looking at the Large Angular motors, but I'm not sure if they'd be powerful enough for the Liebherr.

You'll need the XL motors if you're going to use the Liebherr profile in the C+ app, it recognizes which kinds of motors are connected to the hub and won't work if they are of wrong type. I don't know if the L motors are powerful enough to move the thing but if you're using them, then you'll have to create your own program as well. I guess you could test the motors' strength by building the base and then loading it with some weight to simulate the weight of the whole thing and seeing how it moves (or not).

[Toastie]

1 hour ago, howitzer said:

I don't know if the L motors are powerful enough to move the thing

Well, according to Philo's LEGO 9V motor comparison page, they have very similar properties, torque-wise as well as speed-wise. Actually, the PUp-L motor seems to perform a little better than the XL version, particularly with respect to torque, and this is what matters in @Mantarri's case, isn't it? No idea other than for building purposes (more connection points???) why TLG made these two versions. Maybe they found a better motor during PUp production? Did the XL motor come to market earlier than the L motor? Whatever, I'd say the L-motor should do fine in this case.

Best,
Thorsten

[Aurorasaurus]

30 minutes ago, Toastie said:

Well, according to Philo's LEGO 9V motor comparison page, they have very similar properties, torque-wise as well as speed-wise. Actually, the PUp-L motor seems to perform a little better than the XL version, particularly with respect to torque, and this is what matters in @Mantarri's case, isn't it? No idea other than for building purposes (more connection points???) why TLG made these two versions. Maybe they found a better motor during PUp production? Did the XL motor come to market earlier than the L motor? Whatever, I'd say the L-motor should do fine in this case.

IIRC Racingbrick did some tests and found that the XL motor is better at sustained loads than the L motor.

[Toastie]

1 hour ago, Aurorasaurus said:

the XL motor is better at sustained loads than the L motor

That's interesting. I mean, Philo's setup is quite solid - maybe TLG changed the innards of the motors over time?

Best,
Thorsten

[2GodBDGlory]

4 hours ago, Aurorasaurus said:

IIRC Racingbrick did some tests and found that the XL motor is better at sustained loads than the L motor.

Yeah, I remember watching that video, but that still felt like a pretty small advantage to me, given the equivalent speed and torque values. I took advantage of the greater rarity of XL motors to sell all of mine for enough to replace them with Ls

[Mantarri]

Thanks for the replies, and yeah, I was aware I couldn't use the C+ app with different motors, though not very relevant to me, as I'm planning to use my Robot Inventor hub for part of the build, as I only have one technic hub, and want to use PyBricks for xbox remote control.

 

I'd seen RacingBrick's L vs XL comparison, so was mainly wondering if the large angular motor/L motor are strong enough to use instead of the XLs; the smaller size of the Ls, or unique form factor of the large angular motor sounded more useful for MOCing than being a bit better at sustained loads.