Revision history [back]

I have been developing robot for about 12 years and using ros for more than 8 years. By the way, I am mechanical background, currently more on programming.

I wrote quite a long essay in Chinese two years ago stating why it is prevail. https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/24780066

I just make an abstract.

• ROS is better than what I used before ROS in communication, visualization, simulation, transportation, community, compare to Windows + RTX, IPC, NAOqi, Labview, qnx, etc.
• ROS standardise the message types in robotics. This is why ROS start to thrive. Thanks to Willow Garage.
• Compare to Android (which is more dominant in China for the less functional robot products), ROS definitely has a bright future.

I think if Sebastian is going to remove things from ROS instead of building from scratch, only shows that ROS has its value.

@Sebastian From my opinion, ROS is not designed for embedded system and it is not aim for low level control, though ROS has this feature.

Only thing I can agree with Sebastian is that ROS has safty issues, and security issues due to the networking configurations.

Anyway, welcome to have a discussion.

I have been developing robot for about 12 years and using ros for more than 8 years. By the way, I am mechanical background, currently more on programming.

I wrote quite a long essay in Chinese two years ago stating why it is prevail. https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/24780066

I just make an abstract.

• ROS is better than what I used before ROS in communication, visualization, simulation, transportation, community, commercialization, compare to with Windows + RTX, IPC, NAOqi, Labview, qnx, etc.
• ROS standardise the message types in robotics. This is why ROS start to thrive. Thanks to Willow Garage.
• Compare to with Android (which is more dominant in China for the less functional robot products), ROS definitely has a bright future.

I think if Sebastian is going to remove things from ROS instead of building from scratch, only shows that ROS has its value.

@Sebastian From my opinion, ROS is not designed for embedded system and it is not aim for low level control, though ROS has this feature.

Only The only thing I can agree with Sebastian is that ROS has safty issues, and security issues due to the networking configurations.

Anyway, welcome to have a discussion.

I have been developing robot for about 12 years and using ros for more than 8 years. By the way, I am mechanical background, currently more on programming.

I wrote quite a long essay in Chinese two years ago stating why it is prevail. https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/24780066

I just make an abstract.

• ROS is better than what I used before ROS in communication, visualization, simulation, transportation, community, commercialization, compare with Windows + RTX, IPC, NAOqi, Labview, qnx, etc.
• ROS standardise the message types in robotics. This is That's why ROS start to thrive. Thanks to Willow Garage.
• Compare with Android (which is more dominant in China for the less functional robot products), ROS definitely has a bright future.

I think if Sebastian is going to remove things from ROS instead of building from scratch, only shows that ROS has its value.

@Sebastian From my opinion, ROS is not designed for embedded system and it is not aim for low level control, though ROS has this feature.

The only thing I agree with Sebastian is that ROS has safty issues, and security issues due to the networking configurations.

Anyway, welcome to have a discussion.