
What Comes After the Roomba? - prostoalex
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/21/business/what-comes-after-the-roomba.html
======
GlenTheMachine
Full dosclosure: I am a roboticist. I've been in the field professionally for
about thirty years.

I'm _really_ skeptical that there is anything “after the roomba”. Or, to be
more specific, I'm skeptical that technology used in the home will look
anything like a robot, a self-contained intelligent machine that moves around
and cleans/folds laundry/does dishes.

Ther are a couple of reasons for this. This first is that these problems are
extremely hard to solve. And this is not true just in terms of algorithms, but
also in terms of hardware. A humanoid robot is as complex as, if not more
complex than, an automobile. Currently, humanoid robots go for $500,000 a pop.
Even after economies of scale it's hard for me to imagine that getting below
$50,000 — much less $5,000, which is probably the price range that makes them
viable as anything other than a novelty for wealthy people.

Which brings up the second point. One thing I have learned the hard way in
robotics is that you have to understand precisely what your competition is and
how much money that competition requires to solve the problem. In the case of
an in-home robot, for most of us the competition is our own labor or that of
our significant others/kids/housemates. But we are not the early adopters of
this technology. Wealthy people are. For wealthy people, the competition is
either a live-in assistant or a contract cleaning service. Contract cleaning
services pay their workers approximately minimum wage. Minimum wage is a very
difficult price target for a robot to meet.

And the third issue is that to first approximation _these problems are already
solved_. And not by what we would consider a robot, but by appliances. My
grandmother, for most of her life, kept house without elecricity, and hence
without a dishwasher, vacuum, or dryer. These appliances dramatically reduced
the effort it takes to keep house, without being robots. I strongly suspect
that any cost-efficient solution to folding clothes or taking dirty dishes
from the sink and turning them into clean dishes in a cupboard will resemble
an appliance. If you want your dishes cleaned robotically, then you don't put
a robot in the kitchen. You turn the kitchen into a robot.

~~~
notatoad
A friend's family "solved" the problem of cleaning dishes and putting them in
the cupboard by having two diswashers, a magnet that said "clean", and a
magnet that said "dirty".

~~~
j2bax
So they just eliminated the cupboard? They must not have a whole lot of
dishes!

~~~
seppel
No, in fact they had two self-cleaning cupboards.

~~~
alelefant
That seems like a fire hazard.

~~~
village-idiot
It’s literally full of water.

~~~
alelefant
It was a joke.

------
Endama
I think robots have an uncanny-valley effect not just in aesthetics, but
utility. For example, I actually really like my roomba because it only does
one thing: it cleans my floor (when it doesn't get tangled in some cord).
However, if there was a humanoid robot that can walk around and possibly knock
over something or do something unexpected, I don't want that thing in my
house. What prevents some hacker to compromise the robot and have it stab me
in my sleep?

Another example is Alexa/Google Home. Some people love the convenience these
in-home services provide, but others find the utility itself a liability: is
this thing always listening to me and recording me in my home? The robots can
do too much, they have too many functions and abilities, which makes me
question the intent of the robot.

For robotics to really take off, I think there needs to be a kind of
anthropomorphization that needs to happen: the utility of the robot must be
high enough that I know that it understands my intention and can respond
accordingly; that is to say, that I can have a relationship with my robot.

~~~
jpm_sd
I 100% disagree with your conclusion. People don't want robot buddies, they
want dishwashers. And dishwasher equivalents for other household tasks.

~~~
soared
People probably made that claim about a ton of other things which turned out
false. The best example is music discovery, older generations might've thought
"I want to pick my own music, there is no a way a computer could know what I
like". But then show them Spotify's discover weekly and they discover 10 songs
a week that they live.

~~~
bduerst
I.e. Nobody would admit to wanting an camera+phone+email device before the
first iPhone was released.

~~~
ergothus
Give me a smartphone: "This is great, I don't need a watch!"

Give me a smart watch: "This is great, I don't need to pull my phone out!"

Predicting what people will/won't like seems like black magic to me, with
after-the-fact efforts to diagnose why "obviously" people did/did not love
something somehow only works in hindsight.

I'm not saying the idea of finding something useful and making money providing
it is broken, only that pushing the boundaries is inherently unpredictable,
because we aren't terribly logical (or at least have a lot of variables at
play)

~~~
gowld
> Give me a smartphone: "This is great, I don't need a watch!"

Who ever said that, and why didn't those people carry pocketwatches?

~~~
jacobolus
> _Who ever said that?_

When I was a kid in the 90s, my impression was that most adults wore cheap
quartz wristwatches. 25 years later, their kids have grown up but instead of
wearing watches just carry phones around, because the smartphone is a good
enough time-keeper.

Obviously many people still wear wristwatches, and the same type of people who
wore watches as status-marking jewelry 20 years ago probably still do today.
But wristwatches are no longer _necessary_ for telling time, as pretty much
everyone carries a smartphone everywhere they go. For most people the
additional convenience of having the watch on the wrist isn’t worth carrying
an extra device, at least not all of the time.

------
wpietri
The article mentions "fast, cheap and out-of-control" but doesn't point out
the excellent documentary by the same name:
[https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119107/](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119107/)

The 1997 film, directed by master documentarian Errol Morris, covers 4 people:
a lion tamer, a topiary gardener, an expert on the naked mole rat, and a then-
obscure robot scientist. That robot scientist is Rodney Brooks, founder and
former CTO of the Roomba's maker, iRobot.

I haven't seen it in years, but I adored the film. I saw it in the theater and
had my mind blown: it was clear Errol Morris thought these very different
people had something in common, but he never beats you over the head with it,
letting you make up your own mind. I liked it so much I went back the next day
and the next, something I've never done with a movie before or since. I'll
have to watch it again to see how it looks these days.

~~~
MrTonyD
I attended some lectures by Rodney Brooks - and I similarly had my mind blown.
Over a few lectures he covered a wide variety of research, much of it for
3-letter organizations and it included his development of "scurrying" robots
with multiple sensors and multiple actuators. Of course, much of it was
subsumption architecture - still an interesting topic. He also talked about
how he was trying to find a use for his robotic prototypes, and was creating a
company to release a product. (So I guess this is yet another case of
government investments resulting directly in privatized profit. Pretty typical
- though many seem to want to deny it.)

~~~
ghaff
> (So I guess this is yet another case of government investments resulting
> directly in privatized profit. Pretty typical - though many seem to want to
> deny it.)

You mean, like the Internet?

I thought that was one of the justifications for government-funded research.
Long-term research that jumpstarts shorter-term private development and
productization.

~~~
adventured
> You mean, like the Internet?

No. Most of the ARPANET, much less the Internet, wasn't originated from the
government. They contributed maybe 3% of everything that went into it and
people like to give them most of the credit. It was constructed of components
invented in the private sector, with plenty of private networks among the
first connections. Most of the people that worked on ARPANET were not employed
by the government. SRI, BBN, Xerox were not government agencies. Harvard,
Stanford, MIT, USC are not state schools. The government was the agent behind
bringing ARPANET together. They did not form the actual Internet or invent
most of its technology. Their single biggest contribution was being so kind as
to get out of the way legally.

I'd argue that an easy 97% of everything that has gone into the _Internet_
over the last 35 years, has been private technology and private capital. The
private sector has invested trillions of dollars into building out the
Internet and making it was it is. The government has contributed a laughably
tiny sum by comparison, in both monetary terms and technology.

Besides the myth that the government invented and constructed the Internet,
the government barely has a single dollar it doesn't first take from the
private sector. Nearly all of its resources derive from private sector
production and taxation against that production. The government then
redistributes that private sector money. Factually anything that government
does, in other words, is first thanks to private money that makes it all
possible.

------
nkozyra
To me, food preparation is the big void in automation. A few companies are
trying it here and there, but being able to prepare a decent-tasting meal
(even if you have to do the cleaning yourself) would change some lives
dramatically.

These aren't things that necessarily require advanced AI or sensors or
anything; the basic elements of cooking are relatively simple. The real issue
is the vast diversity of cooking/compilation methods. In other words,
automating meals could be done, but automating all meals would require
something monumental.

But consider simple baked meals, which comprise thousands of recipes.

There are people in the space, but I think a commercial grade Cookbot is a
holy grail for home automation.

~~~
gnulinux
I LOVE cooking, there is no way to express how much I love it. But strangely
this love also has the implication that I hate when I need to cook fast.
Sometimes I hang out a lot in the gym or work and come home around 9-10pm. At
that point cooking for an hour is not option as it's almost bed time, so I
cook fast. I hate this, and I just want ready food (but I never eat out as a
principle).

I searched into this, tried to find startups that can automate my food. I'd be
willing to pay a lot of money if a robot made my food exactly the way I want
it, and then I can cook long meals 3 to 5 times a week. But unfortunately, the
only relevant products are liquid food. There are some startups, such as
Soylent, who claim their product has complete nutritional value. So you just
shake their powder in water and be done with dinner in 2 minutes. I personally
thought this is a distraction from the problem, but I honestly don't know how
could we automate food.

~~~
YokoZar
Why not batch cook and plan on sometimes reheating leftovers?

~~~
gnulinux
Because I think both the process of batch cooking and reheating are bad for
the flavor.

------
kpil
Before dreaming on, why not make a Roomba that actually works.

I have an older Roomba and a newer BotVac, and the BotVac is slightly more
clever, but it's about 10% chance that I won't find it bleeping helplessly on
some new minor obstruction that it found. It's impossible to have a house
where there are absolutely no cables, dropped socks, dropped toys, rugs,
furniture with "tank stopper" properties, curtains that are slightly too low,
etc, etc.

When my vacuum cleaner can untangle itself, I will pay silly money for
something that takes care of my laundry.

After that, something that loads, unloads and sorts my dishwasher would be
nice, but nothing comes close to pairing socks...

~~~
smortaz
On that last bit - pairing socks: finally threw out 50+ multi-colored pairs
and bought 20 in just two colors. All get dumped into one bin after drying.
Three blind pulls guarantees a matched pair. Nice timesaver.

~~~
misterprime
Wait until they start fading at different rates...

~~~
YokoZar
You can solve the uneven wear problem by not replacing them in the bin until
the bin is empty. The laziest way to do this is to not launder your socks
until you run out.

~~~
Udik
Now I understand why I didn't see what the problem was... :)

------
bluedino
The fact that lawn mowing or carpet cleaning isn’t automated yet makes me
think self driving cars are the biggest pipe dream ever.

~~~
sien
These things are meant to be fab:

[https://www.husqvarna.com/au/products/robotic-lawn-
mowers/](https://www.husqvarna.com/au/products/robotic-lawn-mowers/)

But also pricey. A couple of K for one.

~~~
coob
Where do the clippings go?

~~~
eindiran
They leave the clippings to fertilize the lawn.

------
JaRail
I'd really like a robot capable of creating standard meals. If something could
cook up a small variety of basic dinners with customizations, or make a
sandwich, I'd be really pleased. I imagine for a decently sized family, also
having it handle ordering food delivery of necessary ingredients as they start
to run low would be awesome.

~~~
bodas
I think this is better implemented industrially. It's easier to make a robot
that can deliver food (made in a factory), than it is to make a robot that can
cook a variety of meals from raw ingredients. Both are super difficult
problems but delivery robots are at a more advanced stage. Instead of sandwich
making robots we are more likely to see sandwich delivery robots rolling
around the neighborhood, waiting for someone to summon them.

~~~
minitoar
obligatory [http://tacocopter.com/](http://tacocopter.com/)

------
Jagat
Roomba is a great product. I've one that I've used for 4 years thrice a week
without any problem. Another one that I've found indispensable is litter-
robot. If I pay someone $5 to clear the litter of two cats, I'll have broken
even in 100 days.

Sci-fi is rife with humanoid robots doing everything, while all customers want
is specialized products that do one specific thing well and don't cost a lot.

Robotic lawn-mowers - considering there's such a huge market for it especially
in the US, I'm surprised no one has come up with a cheap robotic lawn mower
yet.

There was some rumor about iRobot coming up with their own lawn mower, but
that was in 2016 and we've heard nothing of it yet. [https://gizmodo.com/we-
can-finally-stick-a-name-on-irobots-r...](https://gizmodo.com/we-can-finally-
stick-a-name-on-irobots-rumored-lawn-mow-1782893952)

~~~
keiferski
Only speaking personally, but I actually enjoy cutting the grass. It’s a sort
of zen-like pattern game. I feel like this is a common sentiment.

Sweeping and vacuuming, on the other hand, isn’t nearly as interesting.

~~~
kaybe
Vacuuming is good when you've waited too long and can really really see the
difference it makes (not just a little).

~~~
udkyo
Having a vacuum cleaner that's not a complete PITA helps too (e.g. light,
cordless and powerful)

I don't enjoy any housework and used to use a robot vacuum cleaner more or
less exclusively, but it can't have been off its dock more than twice in the
last 6 months. I actually enjoy doing it myself when I don't have to lug
around a big heavy device with a power cord trailing out of it. Never thought
I'd see the day.

------
tralarpa
A bit off-topic, but as somebody living in Europe, I found it interesting to
discover from the comments here that lawn mower robots are not popular in the
US. Some of the readers don't even seem to know they exist.

What is the reason for this? I know that estates are bigger in the US than in
Europe _on average_ , but there must be still millions of families with lawns
smaller than 10,000 sqft? (which is the maximum lawn size for most robots
below $1500)

(Of course, there could be some bias here; many HN readers probably live in
big cities)

------
Jhsto
Having hacked on Roombas[0], one thing which dissatisfies me is open hardware
access. That is, let advanced users SSH into the robots and let them read the
sensor data and control the robot. Once you have that you could repurpose the
robot for your own needs, which for me in [0] was basic object detection
(trying to find something resembling human legs in this case). This could be
used for either counting people in the room or to give spatial data
information for other use-cases. As demonstrated in my later YouTube video[1]
the floorplans created with the vacuum cleaner laser can be used to position
IoT devices for your own augmented reality stuff, that is, for real-time
position tracking in relation to the room in which the robot is standing in,
or just simply calibrating a gyroscope of another device which then uses the
pre-made floorplans.

Anyhow, one thing which I have been thinking is that given a smart home, do
people rather want to talk to an abstract thing like an Alexa, or will they
want to have a physical thing to which they talk to, like the vacuum cleaner.
I imagine the interaction is a bit different regarding whether you just
command Alexa to turn things off, rather than have a vacuum cleaner, which you
can call to come to you, and still respond similarly to Alexa. With kids, I
guess they'd essentially prefer vacuum cleaners, albeit I haven't really
tested their reaction because the toddlers I know do not speak English for
which the speech recognition stuff is mature. My peers do not expect my vacuum
cleaner to either talk or listen, which it can do both, so it seems like it
should also roam the room around (without cleaning objective) for others to
interact with it. Given the time and artistic freedom, I'd probably buy plenty
of vacuum cleaners and have them scan the campus corridors for stationary
people to talk to, to essentially just see what people talk back to the
robots.

Sorry if the text is incomprehensible, it is quite late.

[0]: [https://youtu.be/mlAEZZ5fPbo](https://youtu.be/mlAEZZ5fPbo) [1]:
[https://youtu.be/OTlOULeNUUo](https://youtu.be/OTlOULeNUUo)

~~~
craftyguy
The botvacs (at least my D85) has a uart interface, and a published API[1]
that allows you to control and read back all sorts of information, including
raw data from the lidar.

1\.
[https://www.neatorobotics.com/resources/programmersmanual_20...](https://www.neatorobotics.com/resources/programmersmanual_20140305.pdf)

Edit: damn, they moved the document, or took it down altogether :(

~~~
baobrien
Most Roombas that I know of also have something like that -- a UART interface,
published spec, and ability to drive/clean/read sensors. I'm not sure if LIDAR
data is available on the higher-end ones, though.

[https://www.irobotweb.com/~/media/MainSite/PDFs/About/STEM/C...](https://www.irobotweb.com/~/media/MainSite/PDFs/About/STEM/Create/iRobot_Roomba_600_Open_Interface_Spec.pdf)

------
blakesterz
I'm surprised (or maybe I just missed it) there isn't a Roomba thing to mow
the lawn that works as well as the Roomba does for floors. That is, does a
decent, but not perfect job. Maybe this is a harder problem to solve mostly
due to the danger?

~~~
sien
These things are meant to be fab:

[https://www.husqvarna.com/au/products/robotic-lawn-
mowers/](https://www.husqvarna.com/au/products/robotic-lawn-mowers/)

But also pricey. A couple of K for one.

~~~
franciscrick1
What do you mean "Fab"?

~~~
DanBC
fab = fabulous, which can mean "amazing" to "really quite good".

~~~
franciscrick1
"meant to be fabulous" is a weird construction.

~~~
DanBC
"meant to be" means "other people say"

------
Johnny555
I think there's still some innovation remaining for the robot vacuum.

Like a robot vacuum that can handle stairs. The Roomba does a pretty decent
job on a single-level, but has to be manually carried up/down stairs and
someone still has to vacuum the stairs themselves.

And one that can automatically detect when it's ingested a wire would be nice,
I've lost 2 USB cables to our Roomba so far.

And this guy would like his robot vacuum to detect when it's run over soft,
pliable waste before it spreads it throughout the house:

[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-
now/2016/08/15/po...](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-
now/2016/08/15/pooptastrophe-man-details-night-his-roomba-ran-over-dog-
poop/88667704/)

~~~
jotux
I have two dogs that shed and was hoping a robot vacuum cleaner would save us
a ton of time. I also thought our house was ideal for a robot vacuum cleaner
(all wood floors except some low-pile rugs) and my wife and I are very clean
and consistent about picking up, but it turned out not to be the case. I
bought a high-end robot vacuum (Neato D5) and used it every day for a week. It
got stuck every time it cleaned, couldn't clean the whole house without a
charge cycle, and I had to empty the bin on it at least two times per
cleaning.

Other than the fact that it was unattended, the robot vacuum was significantly
worse than a regular vacuum. So I'd say there's still a ton of room for
improvement and innovation in the robot vacuum market.

~~~
Johnny555
I'm sure it depends on the dog's hair, our dogs shed short ~1/2 inch long
white hairs that end up all over the place. The Roomba (some mid-range $300
unit) runs every other day (one day downstairs, the next day upstairs) and
does a good job of getting the hair out of the carpet. The bin is always full
of dog hair and lint.

It hasn't completely replaced the regular vacuum, but we can run it much less
frequently (like every other week instead of every other day).

------
resters
We just have to look harder for them.

"self driving" cars are effectively cars with a robotic driver. They aren't
here yet but they are on the horizon.

Arguably, the car itself is a robot. "Hey robot, go pick up soandso at the
airport" or "hey robot please drop off these packages at the UPS store", etc.

Robotic locks "Alexa, lock the front door".

AR technologies on phones is straight out of sci fi, but in sci fi it would
have been glasses or goggles offered by a humanoid robot... but now nearly
everyone's phone can do it.

The Roomba is a great example of a robot that required a significant
redefinition of the "problem" of vacuuming. A normal vacuum picks up some
dirt, a Dyson will pick up significantly more dirt. A Roomba barely picks up
any. The secret is that the Roomba goes all over the floor many times and
eventually does a job comparable to a standard vacuum, but with no human labor
required. The task is also stretched in time, the Roomba takes 5x or 10x
longer than a human would take to do the same job, but it's OK because it can
do the work when nobody is home to be annoyed by the noise.

Industrial automation is significantly enhanced by robotics, and it does a
good enough job that we just buy the resulting products at the store, not
knowing or caring how they were made.

Some robots that could be made with existing tech that would save lives would
be:

\- crossing guard robots that scoot out into the intersection to create a
physical barrier before pedestrians begin to cross, then quickly scoot back to
allow cars once the light changes.

\- yoga robots that stretch and massage the muscles of humans to gently
improve mobility and strength.

\- sex robots create companionship for those who have difficulty with human
companionship.

\- tiny pest control robots will detect and help exterminate rodent and insect
infestations, preventing disease.

\- guardian robots will accompany elderly people, always ready to catch them
if they fall and to call for help if needed. Similar units will accompany
children while they walk to school or go about their communities unattended by
adults.

------
bredren
This article missed an artful nod to Robert A. Heinlen's "The Door into
Summer." This terrific novel not only heavily features the rise and use of
home-robots, but has a bunch of cat stuff in it to-boot.

I give this a hearty recommend for imaginative cat companion-having, home-
robot enthusiasts.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Door_into_Summer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Door_into_Summer)

------
zygotic12
A Roomba that won't spread your pets sick and poo all over the floor?
(apologies this is a long thread and I'm sure someone has this already).

~~~
neumann
hah. that would be awesome.

------
moonbug
Usually me with the hoover, doing the bits it missed.

~~~
stephengillie
This is why you need a general purpose robot - to fill the gap where the
specialized robots can't quite make it.

------
tokyodude
I know it's a 1000x harder but I'd pay for a dusting roomba that climb all the
hard surfaces in my house and removed the dust. Of course apparently roombas
can't even handle the floor so I have no hope there will be shelf crawling min
roombas anytime soon.

~~~
tk75x
There exist remote control cars that are light enough to stick to the wall
with a little suction. Add brushes, a filter, dust storage, and automation and
there's your solution.

------
TheSpiceIsLife
What comes after the Roomba?

Electric cooktops with built in timers.

Why, oh why! does nobody build electric cooktops with built in timers?!

At least, I haven't been able to find one here in Australia at a reasonable
price. I think I saw some huge six zone one with touch controls that had it,
but it was $6,9999.

~~~
tralarpa
Something like this?

[https://www.bosch-home.com.au/productlist/cooking-
baking/coo...](https://www.bosch-home.com.au/productlist/cooking-
baking/cooktops/ceramic-cooktops)

~~~
TheSpiceIsLife
Yes! But it’s $2,000 and won’t fit in the space I have.

Will have to have a closer look when I get home, see if there’s a 60cm model
with timers.

But yeah thanks, I’ve tried looking a few times online. Admittedly haven’t
been in to a store to ask.

------
thomk
Easy: a Roomba that does not smear pet feces.

I would happily spend double the amount of todays best Roomba if they could
invent one that would simply stop when it found pet poop.

After breaking 3 robots over my knee for covering my floor in pet poo, I
decided to simply not vacuum. :D

~~~
mrep
I've heard about that problem so I only run mine while I'm home. Why don't you
do that?

------
k__
We had a Roomba for two years and then replaced it with a cordless vacuum from
Dyson.

The Roomba never cleaned everything and we had to modify our home quite much
to prevent it from getting stuck.

So, after the Roomba is before the Roomba, I guess.

~~~
Spooky23
I laughed when my dad gave me a refurb Dyson "dustbuster" style vacuum -- it's
easily the most useful new cleaning item ever.

Robots imo are less interesting than novel applications of lithium ion
batteries.

~~~
ghaff
I’ve been tempted. I have a housekeeper every few weeks. But I do need to
clean up every now and then. My old canister vac is such a pain to get out for
a small job though that I tend to just avoid whatever needs doing.

~~~
Spooky23
Do it.

It replaces your dustpan, catches bugs, is great for the car, etc. My 6 year
old cleans the dinner table with it.

~~~
k__
Yes, I never liked cleaning much, but these battery powered vacuums are gold.

It improved my life like dishwashers or laundry dryers.

------
oh_sigh
How about a better Roomba? One that can handle obstacles and cables,
intelligently avoid dog poop, can always find its way back to home base for a
charge, etc.

------
bobosha
I think the "all-or-nothing" mind might have something to do with it.
Obviously tech has a long way to go to have a replacement house maid bot. But
there are several bridge applications: e.g.

* a bot that just scrubs dishes and places into a dishwasher

* a stairbot that lugs heavy items up & down stairs

* a bot that separates recyclables from your trash

These are feasible with current tech IMHO.

------
buboard
And even roomba is very mediocre. I dont even use it and when i do i know its
going to do a lousy job. It's still a demo.

~~~
freehunter
I run mine every day. I know it's not going to get 100% of the house clean on
the first pass, but as long as the house doesn't get dirtier than the Roomba
can clean in one day, we're good. If the Roomba gets 50% of the house clean
every day and the house only gets 25% dirtied every day, then every day my
house gets 25% cleaner. It's a life saver with two shaggy dogs and hardwood
floors.

If you run it very infrequently, it'll never have a chance to catch up. You
also need to replace the filters every so often in order to keep the proper
amount of suction.

~~~
cr0sh
My wife and I have bought 5 or 6 roombas over the last several years. We have
a 2000sf house, and run the roomba multiple times a day. We run each one so
often, that we generally replace the batteries and other parts in it multiple
times until the machine finally dies in some weird manner. Our last one "died"
when one of the photodetector sensors went out on it. I looked into fixing it,
but it was one of those jobs that required you to take nearly half of the
robot apart (and the screws are not all the same, and there were something
like 40+ screws to juggle) just to solder in a small phototransistor. Without
that part, the roomba just goes in a circle and then stops. Instead, we bought
another, and that roomba ended up in my junk pile with the others (I'm slowly
building a (broken) roomba army to take over the world - don't tell anyone)...

------
calewis
The Roomba is the single worst tech product I've ever purchased, and I've
brought a lot of junk. So much more hassle than running the hoover round a few
times a week.

I wonder what thier repeat purchase rate is? I suspect it's not that
significant beyond a few die hards.

------
imoverclocked
Am I the only one who considers a dishwasher and a vacuum cleaner to be a very
simple robot? It seems like robot == machine +/\- software. From that
standpoint, we have had increasingly complex robots in our homes for a long
time now.

~~~
sgillen
Yeah I think people want their “robots” to be able to move around. I guess the
washing machine is just that, a machine.

------
smogcutter
The scale of effort and investment going into freeing us of the burden of
caring for the elderly and disabled is astounding.

------
post_break
I'd love a roomba that knows to not smear cat vomit/shit. That's the only
reason I don't have one.

------
sgt101
Odd that they didn't ask Rodney Brookes!

------
elejo
The Roomba 2.0

