Skip to main content

Why the NXT isn't perfect

I've recently had several different people ask me about "flaws" and frustrations with the NXT - things that don't work the way they "should", or don't always work, etc. The canonical example, sure to be trotted out again this year, is the perpetual quest for grail of FLL: driving in a straight line (one aspect of dead reckoning). And I was wondering why I so rarely such frustrations.

I think this is a really important point: not just about the NXT, but life in general (especially with teaching). Real life is messy, unexpected, and constantly surprising - very often, if you expect perfection (in anything), you can end up frustrated. Especially for folks who are used to everything being pre-prepared, and exactly as advertised, every time.

That's not real life.

The NXT is in a rather unique spot. Billed and marketed as a toy, it's both far more and far less than that.

Far more in that it is, in every sense of the word, real engineering, and real robotics (as some of us have immense fun pointing out to "sheet metal" robotic hobbyists). And that means it has the same real-life problems. The world the NXT is interacting with is messy: specular reflections and saturation levels for color sensors, variable sound reflectivity and geometry for US sensors, uneven floors and variations in friction and surfaces for motors, sampling frequency for light sensors and sound sensors, etc.: the list goes on and on. Here is a product that unleashes an entire life-long (as some of us can attest to) world of learning and growing, because it makes no secret of being able to "cut it" in the real world.

It's also far "less" than a toy. It will work in unscripted ways. It will not always work the same way twice. It will challenge and puzzle the user, not passively entertain them. That's actually a problem, in that some people will get frustrated because, billed as a toy, they expect it to "just work".

I don't think, in my experience, you can have both of these constraints perfectly satisfied. And I don't expect them to be. NXT-G, for instance, makes some things very easy for the novice user... while frustrating the heck out of anybody who wants to take the NXT to a higher level (try trig... and no, tossing floats into the mix isn't the solution. Or arrays, a basic ability for any language, crippled in NXT-G). Having a color sensor that can selectively switch bright LEDs on and off looks great, but compromises in other ways on what the sensor can actually detect: color.

So which do you satisfy? Is it a flexible, messy real-world toolkit, or a safe, controlled, entertainment toy? I'd say you accept some compromises... while using the unique abilities to teach young minds. Making a kid (and some adults!) understand that the world is not simple, and that it doesn't work like a video game, is perhaps one of the most important lessons I think you can teach them. Too much in school ends up being "This Is The Answer", when often you later find out "this is an approximation, or a rule of thumb, or a good idea... but not an absolute truth".

That ability to be flexible, to find solutions to hard problems that no one has just given you a solution for, is something that I find really lacking in the people around me (both in grade school, where I help out, and even more so in college, where I actually teach). And the NXT is the ideal tool to work on these skills.

The next time you or your students complain about how the NXT "isn't working", or "isn't doing what it 'should'", you might want to realize that you've just been handed an amazing, rare, golden opportunity. Not the opportunity to "solve the problem", but something much more useful - to teach (or learn) how do find solutions to problems.

Brian Davis

Popular posts from this blog


2023 is the 25th Anniversary of the MINDSTORMS brand. For 25 years, MINDSTORMS has educated and inspired a generation of robot builders, both children and adults. Unfortunately, the LEGO Group decided to end the line on December 2022. Many ROBOTMAK3RS have been passionately involved with the development of MINDSTORMS through the MUP and MCP programs. Even with the newest Robot Inventor line, several ROBOTMAK3RS were invited to submit additional bonus models that were included in the official app. Regardless of the retirement of a major LEGO robotics product line, ROBOTMAK3RS continue to MAKE-SHARE-INSPIRE using all LEGO robotics platforms available to us. Here is the official statement from LEGO. Since its launch in September 1998, LEGO MINDSTORMS has been one of the core ‘Build & Code’ experiences in the company’s portfolio, carrying with it significant brand equity and becoming a stand-out experience for the early days of consumer robotics and leading to current Build & Code

Celebrating MINDSTORMS with a Remix Part 1

In honor of the 25th Anniversary of MINDSTORMS, we asked ROBOTMAK3RS to combine a LEGO set of their choice with a MINDSTORMS set. Here is what these five ROBOTMAK3RS came up with.  MINDSTORMS Chess Assistant by Arvind Seshan Overview: When you are new to chess, it can be a challenge to remember which pieces go where. Now, you can use machine learning and LEGO MINDSTORMS Robot Inventor to build a tool to help you learn where all the chess pieces go on the chess board. Sets used: LEGO® Iconic Chess Set (40174) and MINDSTORMS Robot Inventor (51515) Review: I really like how the chess set base can store all the pieces underneath and that the board neatly splits in half for handy storage. The chess pieces themselves are very sturdy and well built. My only criticism is the building of the box itself. It was quite difficult to see what pieces to use and since the entire box is made mostly of thin plates, it took a lot of time and patience. I would have liked the storage area to be sliding dra

Celebrating 25 Years of MINDSTORMS

In celebration of the 25th Anniversary of MINDSTORMS, we take a trip through history. Please also visit ROBOTMAK3RS Community every week as we highlight different projects all through 2023 in celebration of the anniversary. Some of the early history is based on the content shared by  Coder Shah  in our  MINDSTORMS EV3 Community Group . Some of the text and links may have been edited from his original posts for consistency and clarity.  1984 - Kjeld Kirk Kristiansen watched a TV program called "Talking Turtle," where MIT professor Seymour Papert demonstrated how children could control robot "turtles" using LOGO, a programming language he developed. 1988 - The collaboration between MIT and LEGO resulted in LEGO TC Logo in 1988, which allowed students to control LEGO models using computer commands. The video shows Papert demonstrating TC Logo. 1990 - LEGO TC Logo was hampered since the robots you built had to be tethered to a personal computer. LEGO and MIT