Hacker News Reader

Comment by h2odragon | Hacker News Reader

I'd say someone earned a free AT-AT for the bug report.

On the one hand that's a minor quibbling little problem there, "I have to use tools on this one part when disassembling it", and then the dearth of such problems during their run is an amazing testament to their engineering process. That they have fans that can catch this issue and explain it so well is another testament to the standards they've maintained.

Can we call "lego instructions" an example of software design? I think we must. Programs designed to run on meat CPUs of unknown specs.

View on HN

Lego instructions are the unparalleled 5-star tier on my "ranking of assembly instructions." No words (at least when I grew up, I haven't made a set in a long time), complicated assemblies, yet it's totally clear every step of the way. Glossy, high-res, colorful diagrams. Modular sub-assemblies. Every step is so clear.

Ikea gets a 4-star rating, sometimes 4.5.

Words? Immediately dock 1 star.

If using a manifest ("part A, B, E used in this step"), which is necessary because not everything is as distinct as Lego bricks, and you don't provide a scale printout so I can sort the M6x10's from M6x12's, dock a point. Another point if you don't label the diagram with callouts and expect me to visually discern two similar parts by their 10pixel wide render.

Using fasteners of very similar geometry (see above) for no discernible reason, dock a point.

Low print quality of diagram with the toner chipping off? Insta fail.

Unfortunately, they've moved to electronic instructions for many of their kids sets that also include electronics. You have to use the iPad/Android app to assemble. For example, the playable Super Mario kits.

Now, as far as I've seen, this is limited to kits that are designed to use their apps for play. Those apps are really cool though, so I am willing to look at it benevolently (all the more complicated steps give you an optional assembly video for that step which makes it nicer for smaller kids).

The app for the Duplo train is really surprising. It lets you mirror your custom track setup in the app and then play games with it while controlling the train.

From what I can tell, for those sets without physical instruction books, you can still get the traditional instructions in PDF form from the LEGO website or in the instructions app. That way you don’t have to use the interactive instructions in the LEGO Super Mario app.

Thanks, I'll look for that. I didn't know you could get a pdf out of the app

Yup, still no words. The benefit that provides them is probably quite large, so I doubt they'd move away from it.

I've only ever had one complaint about Lego instructions, and it goes way back to the first big star destroyer set. Early on you're assembling a triangular frame that is the core of the model. After what felt like 50+ pages, you're finally complete and ready to move on to the next part. Except the last page has a 'x2' indicating you need to make two of the bloody things, only at the end rather than the beginning so you can't build two in parallel as you go along.

Being an excited kid I might have missed it on the first page of instructions for that assembly but I sure was annoyed when I saw it.

I’ve been reassembling my Christmas legos, and I noticed the same thing. Except I went back and checked, and every single time I just missed the 2x on the submodule introduction.

So I am also doubting my childhood memories now. Maybe they were always consistent, and I was just in a hurry?

It's experiences like that that teach me to not just follow the instructions but to think about how I would do it, then follow the instructions. It's a delicate balance of blindly following instructions (which is essential-- oftentimes I think I see a better way and start to do it only to realize later on it's not going to work and there was a reason they did it their way) and thinking for yourself, which in your example would probably have sped things up.

There is a perverse charm to the worst of the worst instructions too. The diagram shows the item, but then clearly the parts list and the instructions are from (at least) two different things completely. "It's a couch! there are no wheels"

We should appreciate the incredible joy given to the world by such phrases as "Make sure the knob is well before screwing. Do not unclockwise the tread backwards."

One of my favorites is the mystery part. It's clearly the same finish and stamping line as the rest of the thing, but it doesn't seem to have a functional use anywhere in the product. it's not a spare... is it an optional bracket for a different thing? did it fall out of the inside of something? is it just included in my particular package accidentally?

Of course occasionally you get really lucky and its an Interociter.

> Interociter

Oh, this thing? I use it to make hot chocolate.

Ikea are really missing 1:1 prints of screws and parts I shouldn't mix. See e.g.:

* https://www.ikea.com/us/en/assembly_instructions/malm-storag... Page 9, step 3

* https://images.brickset.com/news/67650_3.png

That is a genius drawing detail. Many manuals would benefit from assuming the appliance was operated by children ...

Ha, I have the Malim!

Yeah, ikea doesn't do the 1:1 (or at least I haven't seen it) but they tend to use unmistakable parts. Like each of the metric cylinder head machine screws are different enough in aspect ratio it's easy (for me) to tell them apart. But I'm good at flatpack assembly (likely due to lego obsession growing up). I can see how that might be confusing for some.

Contrast that with the Anderson door I build last month. Didn't have any scale indication, really small diagrams, lots of nearly interchangeable fasteners, and way too wordy.

Why would one need a 1:1 of that? There are only two sizes of wooden dowels included, and the illustration with the bigger one crossed out pretty clearly indicates that the smaller one should be used here. So what would be the additional benefit of a 1:1 illustration?

That's the example I had in mind because I built a MALM bed last month. I remember models with many more screws. The 1:1 print just makes it easier to differentiate, without having to pull all the different screws from the bag, trying to compare them to the not 1:1 drawings.

You might enjoy this video: Making Fake Directions & Hiring Someone to Build my IKEA Furniture

https://youtu.be/5_FCKzhN_dY?t=334

They make instructions in the style you described that are thoroughly ridiculous and hired people to follow them.

No, we can't call Lego instructions "software design" because they're simply not comparable to software in any meaningful sense. They're nothing more than step-by-step instructions on how to assemble a fixed set of pieces. There's no varying input or output, no calculations being done. They're the same as the instructions to assemble a bookshelf, just with more pieces and steps.

The inputs are the pieces and the output is the finished set.

Then the inputs and the outputs are fixed. A much easier problem.

> Can we call "lego instructions" an example of software design? I think we must. Programs designed to run on meat CPUs of unknown specs.

So in this category of software, the vendor / product name has to be a four-capitals acronym? LEGO, IKEA...

What a time to be alive.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com