From: chandan d. <cha...@ho...> - 2006-06-27 07:24:53
|
Hi everyone, I just saw a few posts about the MS Robotics Studio in the community . I downloaded the CTP version(no source code,but lots of tutorials with documentation errors though). Ever heard of the Microsoft Robotics Group? Well ,when you can get some CMU researchers ,why not start one ?? For people who want a quick and dirty look at things,just download this video by the people fro MS : http://download.microsoft.com/download/a/0/8/a08f801c-ce61-43ae-b31b-27df343dba41/Robotics_SDK.wmv. Microsoft has licensed the PhysX engine from AGEIA, a vendor in hardware-accelerated physics, enabling real-world physics simulations with robot models. The PhysX simulations can also be accelerated using AGEIA hardware.quite simply its the only way for serious gamers to get true mind-blowing physics in gamingThe software comes with a powerful simulation runtime that enables users to develop robots in a rich virtual environment with realistic physics and state of the art rendering. (well open source Opengl and ODE does them well enough). one stringent hardware requirements : A graphics accelerator card suitable for gaming. Also you need the latest DirectX SDK . I just started playing with the kit,but not very happy with the simulation engine and debugging has been hard enough. Well,just like to get feedback of what others think . With software giants stepping into robotics,things are going to be pretty irregular for sure. Regards, Chandan / ) / _ _/_ / )__/_/_ (__/)(//)(/(//) /(_/(// /(/ _________________________________________________________________ Who will win Bollywoods most coveted IIFA awards? You decide! Cast your vote! http://server1.msn.co.in/sp06/IIFA2006/static/weekend.asp |
From: Michael G. <hea...@gm...> - 2006-06-27 07:46:12
|
If you want to try it out, it works just fine with the Visual Studio Express (ie, free) version http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/express/visualcsharp/default.aspx My take is that it's basically Player/Gazebo for people who like C#. They do some really interesting things, like using web services for their message passing so you can debug in IE. I really like their simulator. I think a lot of people would benefit from a MS Robotics plugin for player. At the very least, the simulator would be great for those of us who are stuck on Windows workstations and can't use gazebo. Plus, using the hardware accelerated physics opens the possibilty of doing high-fidelity simulations with large populations. I'd really suggest checking it out. It's refreshing to see someone try to solve the same problems as Player, but come at it in a totally different direction. On 6/27/06, chandan datta <cha...@ho...> wrote: > Hi everyone, > I just saw a few posts about the MS Robotics Studio in the community . I > downloaded the CTP version(no source code,but lots of tutorials with > documentation errors though). > Ever heard of the Microsoft Robotics Group? Well ,when you can get some CMU > researchers ,why not start one ?? > For people who want a quick and dirty look at things,just download this > video by the people fro MS > : > http://download.microsoft.com/download/a/0/8/a08f801c-ce61-43ae-b31b-27df343dba41/Robotics_SDK.wmv. > > Microsoft has licensed the PhysX engine from AGEIA, a vendor in > hardware-accelerated physics, enabling real-world physics simulations with > robot models. The PhysX simulations can also be accelerated using AGEIA > hardware.quite simply its the only way for serious gamers to get true > mind-blowing physics in gamingThe software comes with a powerful simulation > runtime that enables users to develop robots in a rich virtual environment > with realistic physics and state of the art rendering. (well open source > Opengl and ODE does them well enough). > > one stringent hardware requirements : A graphics accelerator card suitable > for gaming. > > > Also you need the latest DirectX SDK . > > I just started playing with the kit,but not very happy with the simulation > engine and debugging has been hard enough. > > > Well,just like to get feedback of what others think . With software giants > stepping into robotics,things are going to be pretty irregular for sure. > > > Regards, > Chandan > > > > > > > > / ) / _ _/_ / )__/_/_ > (__/)(//)(/(//) /(_/(// /(/ > > _________________________________________________________________ > Who will win Bollywood's most coveted IIFA awards? You decide! Cast your > vote! http://server1.msn.co.in/sp06/IIFA2006/static/weekend.asp > > > > > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 > > _______________________________________________ > Playerstage-users mailing list > Pla...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/playerstage-users > > > |
From: Mirko B. <mir...@ie...> - 2006-06-27 12:04:38
|
Il giorno 27/giu/06, alle ore 09:46, Michael Giambalvo ha scritto: > I really like their simulator. I think a lot of people would benefit > from a MS Robotics plugin for player. At the very least, the > simulator would be great for those of us who are stuck on Windows > workstations and can't use gazebo. Plus, using the hardware > accelerated physics opens the possibilty of doing high-fidelity > simulations with large populations. hi, not to fuel the usual foss Vs proprietary sw flame war, but maybe on the list of priorities we should put gazebo enhancements before a ms robotics plugin ... that is, everything could be worthwhile in a suite like p/s, so surely even that kind of plugin, but since dev time is limited I think improving gazebo is more important than enabling users to use ms simulator with player. as for the debug thing, I suppose that a proprietary toolkit can't simply beat an open source one on that ground, no matter how good it is, and if you read Kurt Konolige's last posts on the list probably you get my point ;-) however, I think the introduction of robotics studio can be a great source of inputs and ideas for p/s ... when competition breaks out, evolution does too ;-) Mirko Bordignon - University of Padova, Italy mirko[dot]bordignon[at]ieee[dot]org |
From: smog z. <sm...@gm...> - 2006-06-27 10:39:49
|
> My take is that it's basically Player/Gazebo for people who like C#. > They do some really interesting things, like using web services for > their message passing so you can debug in IE. Debug in IE ? I guess they also used IE to debug IE :-) > I really like their simulator. I think a lot of people would benefit > from a MS Robotics plugin for player. At the very least, the > simulator would be great for those of us who are stuck on Windows > workstations and can't use gazebo. Plus, using the hardware If you are stuck on windows you do not deserve to use P/S/G, simple as that= . Use vmware too run windows from linux, or search for other virtualization t= ool. > accelerated physics opens the possibilty of doing high-fidelity > simulations with large populations. Even something like a simulation of an earthquake where robots try to evacuate a city full of people could be done with a combination of stage and gazebo. Anyway i read somewhere(arstechnica maybe) that this first generation of physics accelerated cards will be very weak in processing. Did you noticed that the guy on the video turned off textures to display the physics aceleration. > I'd really suggest checking it out. It's refreshing to see someone > try to solve the same problems as Player, but come at it in a totally > different direction. MS is always messing people directions nothing new there. > > For people who want a quick and dirty look at things,just download this > > video by the people fro MS > > : > > http://download.microsoft.com/download/a/0/8/a08f801c-ce61-43ae-b31b-27= df343dba41/Robotics_SDK.wmv. See my videos @ http://miarn.sf.net. --=20 Jo=E3o Xavier @ smogzer_at_gmail.com W3 http://miarn.cjb.net Institute for Systems and Robotics University of Coimbra |
From: Michael G. <hea...@gm...> - 2006-06-27 20:27:47
|
On 6/27/06, smog zer <sm...@gm...> wrote: > If you are stuck on windows you do not deserve to use P/S/G, simple as that. > Use vmware too run windows from linux, or search for other virtualization tool. Well, all I can say is not all of us are allowed the choice as to what OS our workstations run. Getting P/S going in VMWare is a no-brainer, however I haven't been able to get Gazebo running. Does anyone have experience running Gazebo under vitualization? Even with the non-accelerated GLX renderMethod, I still get an error every time I try running Gazebo. It's frustrating, as vmware does seem to have some kind of acceleration support (ie, I can run glxgears and I see GLX related attributes in xdpyinfo), but it's lacking something. |
From: Richard v. <va...@cs...> - 2006-06-27 22:36:11
|
On 27-Jun-06, at 3:39 AM, smog zer wrote: > If you are stuck on windows you do not deserve to use P/S/G, simple > as that. That is a silly statement and contributes nothing to a debate about the technical or license merits of code from the Player/Stage Project, the MS robotics system or any other software. Please don't let our technical forum descend into MS-bashing. As a research community, we want the best software infrastructure possible to help us do robotics research, where "best" is some combination of technical functionality, flexibility, cost and licensing. Many of us choose TeX over Word: let's strive to approach the quality of TeX. Richard/ -- Richard Vaughan School of Computing Science / Simon Fraser University |
From: David C. <da...@gm...> - 2006-06-28 06:28:36
|
> Did you noticed that the guy on the video turned off textures to > display the physics aceleration. I'm sure the switch to wireframes was not related to the capabilities or lack of capabilities of the physics cards. It looked like the wireframes were the solids as they are modeled in the physics engine, versus the pretty view with high polygon skins which might be used by vision sensors and the observer view, but not much else. Gazebo has the same limitation: the physics models simple solids, and not necessarily the shapes you actually see. Unfortunately, Gazebo doesn't have a similar "physics" view. Plus the physics cards have nothing to do with display, and only the actual physics engine calculations. I'd love to see this sort of support in Gazebo. Dave |