Thank you for an interesting article. I can think of another explanation
for the problems with Mindstorms sets - the average user experience is
not actually as compelling as you'd think. Certainly there have been a
number of 'expert' sites, and some excellent books on exploring the huge
possibilities of the RIS. However, the average user has just spent two
hundred bucks on a kit and may be disappointed to discover that (a)
programming is not as easy as they thought and (b) with only a limited
number of motors and sensors, getting the RIS to do something
interesting requires an above average level of ingenuity. The kit is
sold on it's huge versatility yet unless the user is an experienced
roboticist they are likely to be limited to the small number of examples
given with the kit. They are also unlikely to understand how or why the
examples work.
 
From experience with my nephews, I can say that the average teenager
finds programming a relatively difficult subject to grasp - at least
partly because it has very little relevance to them. That may sound
contrary given the prevalence of computers in our society, but the
computers and games consoles they play with today are so complex that
they cannot hope to begin to understand them. Contrast that with a
childhood in the 80's where every home computer gave instant access to a
programming interface, and the local magazine store stocked at least
half a dozen magazines devoted solely to programming. Today's teenagers
are presented with computers that do everything they are likely to wish
for, and a massively steep learning curve preventing them from exploring
on their own. In that context, an RIS requires quite precise thinking to
design logic that will work in the real world - it's both constrained in
its feature set (why three inputs/outputs? why not at least four?) but
still complex to understand. Worse still, debugging the behaviour of an
independent physical object requires a highly abstract thought process.
Whilst this isn't beyond every last teenager, it certainly requires a
reasonable investment of time from most before they can hope to see
results - and many will struggle.
 
Combine software and hardware and the problem is huge. Mindstorm owners
must be able to set up their PC, understand programming to some extent,
understand the concept of downloading and independent program execution,
build models that use a number of mechanical principles to do something
effective, and manage a limited number of components to create those
models. Before all this can come into play, they must have the
imagination, skill and judgement to come up with a project that is
suitable to the tools they have to hand. Mindstorms certainly rewards
ingenuity, but sadly it demands ingenuity as well.
 
So, my suggestion is that the average user finds they have spent as much
as they would on a games console - but rather than limitless
possibilities and a wide variety of pre-packaged experiences, they
discover that they are very reliant on Lego to give them further
instruction and that even with investment in additional kits, their
experience doesn't become significantly deeper. The Mindstorm kit gets
put away and having bought in at the pinnacle of the technology, they
are unwilling or unlikely to buy other Lego items.
 
Lego themselves must also be aware that with limited sensors and
actuators, the variety of robots they can offer to the user is not as
great as they'd like. If you examine the hobby robotics scene on the
internet, you'll swiftly discover that if you discount robots that use
very sophisticated hardware and/or software, you are limited to
relatively simplistic behaviour. Without additional specialised
components (which FischerTechnik benefits from), Mindstorms kits rarely
go beyond the 'programmable buggy' model. Even then the limitations are
clear - witness the failure of Mindstorms to have any noticeable
presence in micromouse competitions.
 
I feel your solution - greater education of Lego users so they can make
more of the kits they are offered - would help. However, I suspect the
deeper problem is that Lego have found it difficult to combine software,
electronic and mechanical development into a manageable and cost
effective process. (Take a look at the costs of developing a console
title and apply that to the software that comes with Mindstorms). They
also appear to have found it difficult to step away from the educational
institute origins of the RIS to produce something that is flexible and
sophisticated enough to allow open-ended play. I feel Mindstorms would
have to evolve into a rather different product to fulfil it's original
intention and act as the start of a new customer's Lego collection. In
the current environment, I can't imagine that Lego would be willing or
able to invest in such a redesign.
 
As an aside, Lego offered me a job in Billund working for the department
that was going to produce Mindstorms. At the time I wasn't sure how the
product line would progress and I turned down the offer. In retrospect
that appears to have been a wise choice.
 
Kind regards,
Andy Toone