Talk:Microsoft Robotics Developer Studio

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Robotics Unassessed

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Robotics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Robotics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RoboticsWikipedia:WikiProject RoboticsTemplate:WikiProject RoboticsRobotics
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Player Project

Player Project has its own wikipedia page, so information about player project belongs there, including external links. An entry in the see also section is more appropriate pcr^talk 03:22, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is relevant the good and bad thing of an article topic, for a NPOV. I.e. Esperanto, Biodiesel, Ethanol fuel and so on. One can do it in two ways. Include a criticism section or include a link to other robotics suites (the concurrency it is basic for full NPOV - i.e. see cars topics-). --Altermike 06:53, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you rephrase this in plain english please, I am having great difficulty following your argument. pcr^talk 00:29, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of articles includes criticism to the different topics and because of this, they are neutral. Non-neutrality would be not include the criticism to the article. (have you seen any article of the mentioned?)--Altermike 17:36, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Logo

The logo programming language has no direct relevance to Microsoft Robotics Studio. While Microsoft Visual Programming Language, as a dataflow language has some similarities to functional programming languages like logo, and while robotic turtles have been used in robotics education, there is not currently any work that I am aware of that makes this relevant pcr^talk 03:22, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As in Player Project, one can include this in the criticism section (as in other products, it forgets this traditional and easy to use robotic language ) or as a link. --Altermike 06:55, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License

The License is listed as CTP, but Microsoft has a specific page on it with terms: http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/robotics/bb332140.aspx. Should there be a link to this somewhere, or on the CTP page maybe? 68.163.238.177 01:57, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, if that is the CTP it should be linked to on the CTP page. If it isn't the CTP, this article should be changed so the license name is correct and the link added here. NicM 08:03, 31 August 2007 (UTC).[reply]