Technic is no longer what it once was

[Jim]

11 minutes ago, Erik Leppen said:

Sure, you could use the 4000 other pieces in the 42100 to build lots of cool stuff. But the electronic components will just lie there unused, which I would consider a waste.

Given the plethora of awesome C-models (of the 42100) on Rebrickable, I beg to differ. Admittedly, you can't use the Control+ app to control these models. But it's not that you can't use the electronics.

Don't we have a dedicated topic for this off-topic discussion btw?

[AVCampos]

13 minutes ago, Erik Leppen said:

I haven't come across anything I wanted to build that I couldn't do with good old Power functions. No apps, just good old Lego parts and a remote.

PU's big advantage is inputs: the encoders in the motors and gyros/accelerometers in the hubs let you do additional stuff, like using a motor either as regular motor or as servo, or automatically reversing controls when the 42140 flips upside down.

[Jim]

8 minutes ago, AVCampos said:

PU's big advantage is inputs: the encoders in the motors and gyros/accelerometers in the hubs let you do additional stuff, like using a motor either as regular motor or as servo, or automatically reversing controls when the 42140 flips upside down.

Yup. There are definitely some advantages. Looking at the new Liebherr crane, the max load mechanism is quite ingenious. 

[Zerobricks]

Also inverse kinematics as in case of both Liebeherrs which you can't do without position tracking and interpolation.

[howitzer]

The motors also work perfectly well with the dumb hub with which they are as single purpose as PF motors, or if you want to get fancy with programming, you can use them with the RI hub which gives a lot more options than what's possible with PF.

[andythenorth]

On 7/17/2023 at 3:31 PM, Jundis said:

Just out of curiosity: What was it once and when was "once"? ;-)

Well played, you have won this bit of the internet today 

For those who weren't in alt.toys.lego on usenet 26 years ago, the correct answer to "greatest year" was universally agreed to be 1997

Or 1994.  Or 1990.  Or 1987, Or 1982, 1978 etc etc. 

Isn't the new meme for this GOAT?

Pls send me 'old man strokes beard' emojis, will greatly enjoy.

 

Edited July 27, 2023 by andythenorth

[Rebel_Lego]

Not to derail this topic further, but do the input possibilities of PU really justify the much higher price of PU components?

Just thinking out loud 

[howitzer]

Just now, Rebel_Lego said:

Not to derail this topic further, but do the input possibilities of PU really justify the much higher price of PU components?

Just thinking out loud 

They are only pricey if you buy them separately or in certain sets. In Bricklink the prices are very reasonable, not much different from PF components.

[Moz]

1 hour ago, howitzer said:

They are only pricey if you 

... don't already own a compatible smartdevice. TLG have also not guaranteed that they will work after release, unlike the rest of their products. It falls under the "software has not warranty" exception.

[howitzer]

On 7/28/2023 at 12:52 AM, Moz said:

... don't already own a compatible smartdevice. TLG have also not guaranteed that they will work after release, unlike the rest of their products. It falls under the "software has not warranty" exception.

Practically everyone who can afford Lego at all has a compatible smart device anyway, and third party software will keep them going even if TLG doesn't. And then there's the dumb hub, which will allow operation also without a smart device.

[AVCampos]

44 minutes ago, howitzer said:

third party software will keep them going even if TLG doesn't.

This has been proven time and again for MINDSTORMS: thanks to the fan community, I can still program my RCXs in a current computer. What worries me regarding future-proofing isn't the software, but the hardware, namely proprietary rechargeable batteries such as the 8878.

[Bartybum]

16 minutes ago, AVCampos said:

What worries me regarding future-proofing isn't the software, but the hardware, namely proprietary rechargeable batteries such as the 8878.

I guess for that we have bootlego from the great people's republic

Edited July 30, 2023 by Bartybum

[2GodBDGlory]

25 minutes ago, AVCampos said:

This has been proven time and again for MINDSTORMS: thanks to the fan community, I can still program my RCXs in a current computer. What worries me regarding future-proofing isn't the software, but the hardware, namely proprietary rechargeable batteries such as the 8878.

That doesn't worry me so much, since I'm comfortable soldering up generic rechargeable batteries and using 3D printed housings. Of course, not everyone is willing or able to do that, and it doesn't keep the original Lego look, but it's definitely doable. Perhaps one day there'll be a market for third-party rechargeable batteries to fit things like Mindstorms, perhaps made by hobbyists with that skillset (Kind of like that one a guy had on Kickstarter for the PU box recently) ? The good thing with 8878, at least, is that there's an equivalent AAA battery box to use instead, but things like the latest Mindstorms could be problematic

[Moz]

3 hours ago, howitzer said:

Practically everyone who can afford Lego at all has a compatible smart device

Really? I'm one of the unlucky few whose smart device isn't compatible? That's disturbing.

Edited July 30, 2023 by Moz

[Jurss]

55 minutes ago, Moz said:

whose smart device isn't compatible

Which one is that?

[2GodBDGlory]

1 hour ago, Moz said:

Really? I'm one of the unlucky few whose smart device isn't compatible? That's disturbing.

Just a thought, but I wonder if you could download an older, compatible, version from an APK website.

I run PU and Control+ on my 2017 Moto G5 Plus, but it's old enough now that future updates for PU at least aren't supported, and I assume that if I deleted it, I couldn't re-download it.

I was trying to download Microsoft OneNote for it recently, and it wouldn't work, so in the end I went to APKPure (or something like that), and found an older version that worked on Android 8, unlike the new version that only works on Android 9+, so maybe a similar thing could be done with Lego apps?

[Moz]

I have a Fairphone 3 (which runs a very recent version of Android). The Lego app installs and runs just fine, but it will not connect to any C+/PU device I've tried. Buying a scumphone is definitely an option, but it's a significant ethical cost as well as financial.

I played around with a couple of older APKs but they had the same problem, as did the alternative C+ control apps that I tried. I vaguely recall looking at the officially supported devices list and being surprised that there were so few on it, but that's kind of irrelevant because there's no intersection between the "less awful smartphones" list and the "Lego compatible" list. Which puts a real dent in TLG's claims of caring about environmental or social impacts.

It doesn't help that trains come with physical controllers and the PF controllers are half way to a modular physical controller setup already. Which suggests that there is some kind of market for a physical C+ controller beyond the train one.

Edited July 30, 2023 by Moz

[howitzer]

2 hours ago, Moz said:

I have a Fairphone 3 (which runs a very recent version of Android). The Lego app installs and runs just fine, but it will not connect to any C+/PU device I've tried. Buying a scumphone is definitely an option, but it's a significant ethical cost as well as financial.

I played around with a couple of older APKs but they had the same problem, as did the alternative C+ control apps that I tried. I vaguely recall looking at the officially supported devices list and being surprised that there were so few on it, but that's kind of irrelevant because there's no intersection between the "less awful smartphones" list and the "Lego compatible" list. Which puts a real dent in TLG's claims of caring about environmental or social impacts.

It doesn't help that trains come with physical controllers and the PF controllers are half way to a modular physical controller setup already. Which suggests that there is some kind of market for a physical C+ controller beyond the train one.

This problem happens also with every third party app? If so, then maybe your phone really is in some way defective - it could even be your specific device and not Fairphone 3 generally.

The lack of physical controller is one of the major flaws of the PU system and it's something everyone has been longing for since the first reveal of PU. I really hope it's realized some day in some officially supported form that's more versatile than the train remote.

[Bensch55]

On 7/24/2023 at 12:39 PM, johnnytifosi said:

We've reached 78% licensed sets in 2023 ffs

The problem with the licensed sets isn't the license or the price that comes with it. IMO it becomes a problem when Lego tries to sell me Porsche 911 with double wishbone suspension, a boxer that is actually a V6 with 180° bank-angle and a gearbox that has nothing to do with the real thing, all of that on top of a skateboard chassis. 

All of that wouldn't be an issue if it was "Generic sportscar XY".

Sell me the Porsche/Lamborghini/Ferrari/Bugatti badge, I expect the details to be spot on.

However, TLG showed that they are actually capable of delivering something on this level: The BMW S1000RR and the Yamaha bike feature an extrodinary level of detail in the engineering aspects compared to the real thing (the Yamaha even featuring a separate frame that the engine and gearbox get inserted in). Please more of that in the future for other sets.

[lcvisser]

On 7/26/2023 at 3:56 PM, Erik Leppen said:

The electronics are designed as single-use, yes. And they are a large fraction of the cost of some sets. As far as I can see in set reviews, the electronic control+ components come with apps that show that particular model, so the whole experience is designed around specific sets. Which I would define as single-use (or, better, single-purpose). I'm kinda surprised that the designers who have said: this goes against the spirit of what Lego is (I'm sure there have been designers who said that) haven't won the argument.

Sure, you could use the 4000 other pieces in the 42100 to build lots of cool stuff. But the electronic components will just lie there unused, which I would consider a waste.

I don't understand this argument. The LEGO PoweredUp App supports also the Technic Hub and motors. And that app lets you control the motors in pretty much any way you want. So how does that block you from reusing a set's electronics for MOCs?

Perhaps the issue is in that Control+ is seen as a different thing, whereas it is just a thin layer on top of PoweredUp? I never bought a Control+ set, so I'm not sure how it is explained in the manuals, but I think it is unfair to consider the entire electronics part of a set as "single purpose", while in fact it is just the app (Control+ profile) that is single-purpose.

 

Also: 1992.

Edited July 30, 2023 by lcvisser

[AVCampos]

15 hours ago, 2GodBDGlory said:

I was trying to download Microsoft OneNote for it recently, and it wouldn't work, so in the end I went to APKPure (or something like that), and found an older version that worked on Android 8, unlike the new version that only works on Android 9+, so maybe a similar thing could be done with Lego apps?

Hmm, good idea. I recently formatted my LG V20 (Android 8) and lost access to MyBricks. I'll try going there to find an older, still compatible version.

[Maaboo the Witch]

I can pinpoint the very moment this theme was dealt a crippling blow from which it hasn't yet recovered. "O witchy pants," I hear you cry, "we beseech thee! Show us the terrible error inflicted on this once great theme!"

Alright, you don't have to yell! Anyway, here.

[gyenesvi]

On 7/30/2023 at 7:57 PM, lcvisser said:

I don't understand this argument. The LEGO PoweredUp App supports also the Technic Hub and motors. And that app lets you control the motors in pretty much any way you want. So how does that block you from reusing a set's electronics for MOCs?

Perhaps the issue is in that Control+ is seen as a different thing, whereas it is just a thin layer on top of PoweredUp? I never bought a Control+ set, so I'm not sure how it is explained in the manuals, but I think it is unfair to consider the entire electronics part of a set as "single purpose", while in fact it is just the app (Control+ profile) that is single-purpose.

I agree. In principle, using the Powered Up app, one can build a MOC and "program" a control interface for it (at least that's the idea, though the coding canvas thingy sucks for a few reasons, like missing support for HW elements and missing documentation until recently).

Another way to reuse the electronics without coding is through the official Control+ profiles. If you happen to build a motor configuration that matches that one of the official sets, you can use that sets Control+ profile for control without any coding. That's what alternate models do for one, and with the increasing number of official sets and profiles, more and more simple motor configs are supported for cars for example. Though I understand that's kind of a cumbersome approach. But definitely the electronics itself is not single-use (but true that more flexible SW support would be really needed).

[johnnytifosi]

I dig out this topic because Racing Brick posted a nice video that fits it quite well, an interview with  Lego staff about Technic's current status and future direction. TL;DW: Lego will stick with blue pins, colour vomit, licensed sets, app control and no B-models. Deal with it.

 

 

[valenciaeric]

45 minutes ago, johnnytifosi said:

I dig out this topic because Racing Brick posted a nice video that fits it quite well, an interview with  Lego staff about Technic's current status and future direction. TL;DW: Lego will stick with blue pins, colour vomit, licensed sets, app control and no B-models. Deal with it.

So in summary, the company has got so big it cannot change anything in its processes anymore. I have dealt with it buy not buying any Lego since 2021 and TBH it hasn´t been much of a hardship.

Edited October 27, 2023 by Milan
Do not quote videos from the same page.