Micro USB plz?

[God Ginrai]

This: http://media.digikey.com/pdf/Data%20Sheets/Tyco%20Electonics%20AMP%20PDFs/1932259_Dwg.pdf at 17.56mm tall would just be ugly. That is as tall as the base section of the current Pandora. The Pyra would have to get thicker to accommodate it.

Actually, the Pandora's base-section is about 20mm, so that's not as tall as the base section.

-God Ginrai

 

[thatgui]

This: http://media.digikey.com/pdf/Data%20Sheets/Tyco%20Electonics%20AMP%20PDFs/1932259_Dwg.pdf at 17.56mm tall would just be ugly. That is as tall as the base section of the current Pandora. The Pyra would have to get thicker to accommodate it.

Actually, the Pandora's base-section is about 20mm, so that's not as tall as the base section.

-God Ginrai

Unless I made an error, the base section is about 18mm high (its a little more) - so the third time (from my side) the question remains on how you want to include that into the Pandora ?

 

[God Ginrai]

This: http://media.digikey.com/pdf/Data%20Sheets/Tyco%20Electonics%20AMP%20PDFs/1932259_Dwg.pdf at 17.56mm tall would just be ugly. That is as tall as the base section of the current Pandora. The Pyra would have to get thicker to accommodate it.

Actually, the Pandora's base-section is about 20mm, so that's not as tall as the base section.

-God Ginrai

Unless I made an error, the base section is about 18mm high (its a little more) - so the third time (from my side) the question remains on how you want to include that into the Pandora ?

Well, before I made my post, I measured my Pandora, so...

-God Ginrai

 

[slaeshjag]

However, the PCB does not have 17mm of clearance. So the pandora would still have to be made thicker for it to fit.

 

[God Ginrai]

However, the PCB does not have 17mm of clearance. So the pandora would still have to be made thicker for it to fit.

True, if you just mount it on the PCB normally.

-God Ginrai

 

[thatgui]

Well, before I made my post, I measured my Pandora, so...

Not that these two mm would play any real role in the discussion: Unless we have different definitions of the Pandoras base, I would like to ask you to measure again.But even then, you have to evaluate the case thickness too, so unless you want a very thin case in that section the Pandora would need to get bigger.

True, if you just mount it on the PCB normally.

So what you are saying is that the whole device should be designed around one connector, that you deem more reliable, but actually have nothing to prove that fact except personal experience ? I have personal experiences with a device that has an USB-B receptable - the receptable is almost loose (and it gets far less use than the Pandora). But I think that this is not a problem with the connector itself, but just either cheap manufacturing or a faulty board/case design.
And regarding the connector itself, wouldn't such a big connector also introduce a big (in scale: "giant") lever, that would stress both case and pcb even more ?

Edit: Corrected some spelling mistakes

 

[God Ginrai]

True, if you just mount it on the PCB normally.

So what you are saying is that the whole device should be designed around one connector, that you deem more reliable, but actually have nothing to prove that fact except personal experience ?

No, I was implying that we did not have to mount it on the PCB normally.

-God Ginrai

 

[thatgui]

No, I was implying that we did not have to mount it on the PCB normally.

But that will also complicate the whole design, and probably weaken the whole thing, as they are surely designed with proper mounting in mind. But even then you have to make the Pyra thicker as there is just no spare room that could be filled up with it.

 

[Neelix]

True, if you just mount it on the PCB normally.

So what you are saying is that the whole device should be designed around one connector, that you deem more reliable, but actually have nothing to prove that fact except personal experience ?

No, I was implying that we did not have to mount it on the PCB normally.

-God Ginrai

If you're going to go there,  couldn't an alternative mounting solution also solve any structural integrity issues with the micro-USB?    If you are going to go to the trouble of mounting a connector separately from the mainboard anyway then you may as well use the connector which gives you access to the most features.

- Neelix

EDIT:  Note that I don't actually think this to be a workable idea, but if the only way to use a particular part also eliminates any benefit of using that particular part it does make it seem kind of a wasted effort.

 

[WizardStan]

No, I was implying that we did not have to mount it on the PCB normally

Have you got something in mind? A USB port that doesn't have its mount point on the bottom? That's one thing missing before your argument can be given any serious consideration: does such a thing even exist?And either way, even if you do find such a thing, it's still as thatgui said, effectively designing the whole thing around a single port; it's going to change the position of the PCB at least. I would also suspect that mounting it on a flat surface is what gives it maximum strength, but not mounting normally, somehow mounting it perpendicular to the board, instinct tells me that it would necessarily be less strong than if it were mounted normal and flush.

 

[hedwards]

And no, the battery doesn't affect the structural integrity, but it does affect how frequently the device is plugged in. In the case of that device, you really have to plug it in at least once a day if you're using it much. And even with that, it still has held up to 4 years of use.

If you read my post, you certainly didn't bother to comprehend what I wrote. If you're going to respond to my posts, at least spend some time to read them for comprehension, please.

I understood that you were implying that a user would plug it in less and even said that was your implication. And I'm saying that it doesn't apply to all users. For example, whenever I am not using my 3DS, I always plug it into the charger, so that it is always 100% when I want to use it. I am not the only person I know who does this. I know many people who have done the same for their DSes or iDevices and phones. You are trying to take your own habits and use it as a blanket statement to prove your point about durability of the device. However, your point falls apart like a house of cards because not everyone is the same as you.

I am done taking my time to read and respond to your posts only for you to act like a jackass in return. Unlike Grench and the others who are actually putting forth ideas and discussing the benefits of what they want, you're only goal in this topic seems to be putting me down.

-God Ginrai

If you're going to accuse me of being a jackass, the least you could do is actually read the posts that you're responding to.

The typical user of a device that gets the kind of run time that the Pyra is going to get, is not going to be plugging it in every day. And AFAIK, they aren't going to be removing the dedicated power port. Even if they do, the microUSB standard is going to hold up to that better than the miniUSB standard did.

The microUSB ports I've had have all been sufficiently durable to outlast the device that they were installed in, my phone in particular is plugged in at least once a day, and usually more times than that. Whether or not I personally plan on plugging the Pyra in that frequently has nothing at all to do with the assertion that the port is durable enough to. Plugging it in several times a day is more than what the typical users is going to be doing and it's unlikely to make sense to over engineer it sufficiently to make that reasonable.

I shouldn't have to have spelled that out for you, it's not rocket science that if a device that's capable of being plugged and unplugged at least once a day, that it's sufficiently strong to handle typical use. I'd be very surprised if there were perverts buying these just to plug and unplug dongles all day, which is pretty much what it would take for these things to fail at an unreasonable rate.

MicroUSB is the standard for phone chargers in the EU, and it seems very silly to me to use an obsolete cable jack just to avoid a theoretical weakness that can be engineered around. It's not exactly rocket science engineering a microSD port.

Whereas using a microUSB port maximizes the chances of people being able to reuse a different power plug if they misplace the official cable and means that they don't need to carry an additional one just for the Pyra on vacation or wherever.

No, I was implying that we did not have to mount it on the PCB normally

Have you got something in mind? A USB port that doesn't have its mount point on the bottom? That's one thing missing before your argument can be given any serious consideration: does such a thing even exist?And either way, even if you do find such a thing, it's still as thatgui said, effectively designing the whole thing around a single port; it's going to change the position of the PCB at least. I would also suspect that mounting it on a flat surface is what gives it maximum strength, but not mounting normally, somehow mounting it perpendicular to the board, instinct tells me that it would necessarily be less strong than if it were mounted normal and flush.

Mounting it along the board is going to be the strongest as it maximizes the torque provided by the board and minimizes the torque provided by the cable on the port. Desktops that stack the ports will be somewhat less resilient, but in the case of a single port, it's always done like that for portable devices AFAIK, because it's more durable.

 

[comradekingu]

Chosing a SoC is a compromise, it dictates what kind of I/O there will be. As such, the usb consortium calls the shots on the ports that are used. Its a standard, dealing with it is step one, and its the right step to take.

Use the same usb everyone else does, reap the benefits. Making a AC/DC adapter is cause for concern in that its additional work. Different standards is cumbersome. All of us have plenty of powersupplies, as does everyone else.

Effort into redundant powersupplies is effort lost on doing something environmentally unfriendly at the monetary cost of both the customer and supplier.

Can we please use our time more constructively and actually come up with some proposed spec that might have some relevance?  Personally i would like to see all usb ports used, with combo displayport (dockport) and esata.

Are there any other things left on the board (5432) or more combos that can be used?  GPIO, SDI, uart, etc what kind of thing is most wanted out of the more obscure signaling available?

Side question: If the pyra is to be used as a game controller/keyboard or anything else in slave mode, will it need a USB id then? The usb consortium calling shots got me thinking, and they have been quite hard on giving out IDs to opensource projects lately.

 

[DAP]

This: http://media.digikey.com/pdf/Data%20Sheets/Tyco%20Electonics%20AMP%20PDFs/1932259_Dwg.pdf at 17.56mm tall would just be ugly. That is as tall as the base section of the current Pandora. The Pyra would have to get thicker to accommodate it.

Actually, the Pandora's base-section is about 20mm, so that's not as tall as the base section.

-God Ginrai

It is only 20 mm if you include the height of the buttons and nubs. I actually measured it to get that number.

 

[levi]

Just to settle this argument, I've just measured my Pandora to 0.02mm resolution. The outside of the base is 17.56mm thick (coincidentally). The plastic is at most 1.21mm thick, so the space inside is 15.14mm or perhaps a little more. Either way, a little short of that digikey part's height, however it's wired to the board.

 

[_wb_]

Nice measurements!

 

[levi]

Vernier calipers rock!

 

[Grench]

Side question: If the pyra is to be used as a game controller/keyboard or anything else in slave mode, will it need a USB id then? The usb consortium calling shots got me thinking, and they have been quite hard on giving out IDs to opensource projects lately.

Since the USB consortium is a fee based membership organization, them not "giving out IDs to opensource projects" should not surprise anyone. Getting IDs assigned is a benefit of membership - which costs several thousand USD. If the Pyra needs a device ID, ED's company would likely have to join/pay into the organization that issues them.

 

[Binky]

Vernier calipers rock!

Electronic ones with LCD readouts are for wimps - right?

 

[TrashyMG]

Vernier calipers rock!

Electronic ones with LCD readouts are for wimps - right?

Right!

slowly hides his digital caliper..

 

[levi]

I did have one of those digital calipers for a while, and it worked well until I discovered how quickly it ate through the included button cell even when off (which I guess is why they included a spare in the package).  For my purposes, manual ones with infinite battery life which are only slightly harder to read are better