Control+ General Discussion

[kbalage]

It's not specific to this app, other Bluetooth control apps like SBrick or BC2 needs the same. It has something to do with the Bluetooth implementation in the Android system, without that permission it wouldn't work. 

[Aris]

Hi all!

Any news about a Lego rechargeable control+ battery box ?

I guess we need that.

Edited May 10, 2020 by Aris

[kbalage]

This is not strictly related to the Control+ app, but I guess people usually consider Control+ as the Technic term for Powered Up so it might be interesting for many of you.

I had a great opportunity to ask questions and talk about the Powered Up system with the app's product owner who shared many interesting details about the development, why they did or did not do certain things and what we can expect coming in the near future. There's a written version of the Q&A here and you can watch the video below - https://racingbrick.com/2020/05/lego-powered-up-intervew/

 

[Gimmick]

1 hour ago, kbalage said:

This is not strictly related to the Control+ app, but I guess people usually consider Control+ as the Technic term for Powered Up so it might be interesting for many of you.

I had a great opportunity to ask questions and talk about the Powered Up system with the app's product owner who shared many interesting details about the development, why they did or did not do certain things and what we can expect coming in the near future. There's a written version of the Q&A here and you can watch the video below - https://racingbrick.com/2020/05/lego-powered-up-intervew/

Pretty nice.

At least they are aware of the downsides and are working on them. I'm looking forward to the infos/updates at the end of this month.

Maybe wrong priorities have been set in the past, maybe not - difficult to say and I will not judge them, but the big slow Lego ship seems to be on the right course now. Hope there will be a more functional remote control in the future.

[M_longer]

Control + HUB and motors available.
Time to sell your kidney. Really.

I am really, really angry about pricing of new C+ elements at LEGO.com.

Picture show prices in €, but here are some other currencies:

88012 Technic Hub | 1 piece
US $89.99 | CAN $119.99 | UK £74.99

88014 Technic XL Motor | 1 piece
US $39.99 | CAN $49.99 | UK £29.99

88013 Technic Large Motor | 1 piece
US $39.99 | CAN $49.99 | UK £29.99

Two C+ motors are worth more than entire 42095 set these days. Even HUB alone is worth more!

42109, which use single HUB, single L and single XL motors has 129.99€ MSRP price. Those electric parts bought alone are worth more!

Older PF elements are much more cheaper. Hey, PF XL is three times cheaper than its C+ counterpart!

Even PF servo motor, the most expensive PF motor to date is 10€ cheaper than C+ motors.

What the heck?

 

 

[BusterHaus]

30 minutes ago, M_longer said:

What the heck?

You're comparing apples with pears.  Stepper and servo motors are always more expensive than "dumb" electronic motors. There is a price to the precision and control that they offer.

A better comparison would be EV3 components. The large servo motor is $29.99, so it looks like its equivalent is 33 percent more expensive. 

 

[M_longer]

4 minutes ago, BusterHaus said:

There is a price to the precision and control that they offer.

Yay, precision for powering driveshaft in a 3kg model is what I always wanted ;)

Edited June 1, 2020 by M_longer

[kbalage]

1 minute ago, M_longer said:

Yay, precision for powering driveshaft in a 3kg model is what I always wanted ;)

Why would you bother using PU motors then?

[M_longer]

12 minutes ago, kbalage said:

Why would you bother using PU motors then?

Because more and more people will buy 42099/42109/42100 and they will only have new C+ range of components. So MOCs with instructions should have them too ;)

[efferman]

4 minutes ago, M_longer said:

Because more and more people will buy 42099/42109/42100 and they will only have new C+ range of components. So MOCs with instructions should have them too ;)

This is why i make my instructions for both.

[Bartybum]

WTF, I hope they introduce dumb motors without position encoding, or at least update the old PF motors to have PU connectors. That's extortionately expensive.

[Zerobricks]

7 minutes ago, Bartybum said:

WTF, I hope they introduce dumb motors without position encoding, or at least update the old PF motors to have PU connectors. That's extortionately expensive.

The motor from Batmobil has no encoder, it's same size as M motor.

[suffocation]

So just the electronics of 42100 costs €405.

I got 42100 for €270.

Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

[howitzer]

New PU hubs go for like 20€ and motors for like 10€ in Bricklink, so I wonder who TLG is kidding with those prices...

[AVCampos]

Maybe availability isn't so big yet and they want to discourage people from buying them separately in order to have enough to ship in sets?

[kbalage]

2 minutes ago, AVCampos said:

Maybe availability isn't so big yet and they want to discourage people from buying them separately in order to have enough to ship in sets?

Exactly my thoughts. The app side is not prepared either yet for easy MOCing so that's TLG's way of limiting the usage of the PU parts.

[hjxbf]

Two simple rules of Economics in effect here:

1) Individual parts always cost more than the complete product. Think of your car or your gadgets; replacement parts are always extortionately priced, just because they can. 

2) Make a product of high desirability or demand attractively prices as a package part, and very expensive separately. People will buy the set for the parts, spending more money than intended, in order to get a better deal. In addition, those who would only by the one part anyway, will be extorted for their set minds.

Maximize profits, people. The chorus of Economics.

The prices will drop significantly in a couple of years to keep stock moving.

Edited June 1, 2020 by hjxbf

[suffocation]

3 hours ago, kbalage said:

Exactly my thoughts. The app side is not prepared either yet for easy MOCing so that's TLG's way of limiting the usage of the PU parts.

True - but most MOCers are familiar with the BuWizz app, which more than makes up for TLG's shortcomings.

[kbalage]

Just now, suffocation said:

True - but most MOCers are familiar with the BuWizz app, which more than makes up for TLG's shortcomings.

Except for the lack of steering, which makes it still useless for anything that requires a servo. 

[suffocation]

Most mocs don't really need a servo

[kbalage]

2 minutes ago, suffocation said:

Most mocs don't really need a servo

Just had a quick look on rebrickable, the PU L motor is used in 15 MOCs and out of that 10 is some sort of car. They definitely need proper return to center steering.

[suffocation]

There are mechanical workarounds using an M motor and rubber bands

In any case, those prices are extortionate.

[Aris]

Oh my goodness. Without a Control+ rechargeable box I will return back to power functions.

[kbalage]

4 minutes ago, suffocation said:

There are mechanical workarounds using an M motor and rubber bands

Which is a totally appropriate high-tech solution in a situation where the hardware would be capable and we are talking about app control 

I'm not saying the prices of the individual motors are justified, I agree with the @hjxbf about the possible reasons. I just don't like to see the praising of the BuWizz app when it is simply not supporting fully either the PU hardware yet. It has undoubtedly more customization options than the PU app currently, but from another perspective it is still less capable.

[suffocation]

1 minute ago, kbalage said:

Which is a totally appropriate high-tech solution in a situation where the hardware would be capable and we are talking about app control 

Why go high-tech and expensive when low-tech and cheap works just as well in most cases?