Micro USB plz?

[WizardStan]

The I²C is a bit awkward to access (only 1.8v on the pads accessable iirc?)

There were two sets of pads, one at 1.8v the other at 3.3v.But regardless, an excellent point: the OMAP5 has up to 4 USB ports. If we can use three of them, have two external and one just pads inside, then users can hack in internal USB devices, or wire a third USB port to the outside, or whatever. Should be very simple to do in theory, the pads can just go wherever there's room, no need to make traces to a specific location. The only problem is that those USB ports are multiplexed with other things. It's way too complicated for me to follow completely. One USB port is multiplexed with the IR UART port, so if we want IR that only leaves us with 3 possible USB ports anyway, and one of those may be used by something else as well, I'm not sure, so it could come down to a vote of which would be more useful: a third internal USB port or an IR port. Or maybe not. Maybe ED isn't interested in doing either anyway

edit: Oh wait, duh. The USB and IR port are multiplexed to the same lines: expose the pads and the software can change what they are as needed: you want an internal or third external USB port? Wire it up and flip the switch. You want an IR port? It's just as easy. That would mean neither of these could be standard, but optional non-standard options are still pretty cool.

 

[Granitehead]

The screw holes would be in the Pyra case (maybe some metal plate to fortify it), and the screws would be in the connector, like how you can secure a VGA cable. That way most of the torque/stress would not be on the port itself or the board it is attached to, but on the case.

That's what I wasn't sure but hoped you were saying.

3. One full-sized USB 3.0 Standard-A port (which is backwards compatible with USB 2.0 and 1.x), and one micro-USB 3.0 OTG port (with SlimPort support). And maybe one mini-USB 1.1 OTG port too, just for backwards compatibility with the Pandora.

I think three is too much and it would be software compatible anyway, you just would need to get a new cable which is so cheap that there is really no point in including an additional port just for that.

 

[_wb_]

3. One full-sized USB 3.0 Standard-A port (which is backwards compatible with USB 2.0 and 1.x), and one micro-USB 3.0 OTG port (with SlimPort support). And maybe one mini-USB 1.1 OTG port too, just for backwards compatibility with the Pandora.

I think three is too much and it would be software compatible anyway, you just would need to get a new cable which is so cheap that there is really no point in including an additional port just for that.

I tend to agree -- I barely use the mini-USB port on my Pandora, and like you say, even if you do have lots of peripherals with a mini-USB cable, it should be easy enough to change the cable or in the worst case use an adapter.

Anyway, I think we need one full-sized USB port, and if we can have only one USB 3.0 port, I think it makes most sense to have it on the full-sized port. You'll most likely need the extra speed on devices like external hard disks, memory sticks, picture and video cameras, and those will most likely come shipped with a full-sized connector. It would be silly to have to use an adapter in order to use a USB 3.0 memory stick at max speed.

 

[bzar]

The ports available depend entirely on the SoC in the end. If it is OMAP5, like some speculate, there's probably 1xUSB3 OTG and 3xUSB2 host ports available. If the only port that can do OTG is also the only USB3 and the OTG part can only be used if it's micro-sized, I say make it micro-sized. I care more about gadget mode than maximum speed.

 

[Grench]

I think the end choice really comes down to either:

1. Having 2 full sized USB type A ports - one 3.0 and one 2.0 then needing a USB to micro USB adapter to charge from a cell phone charger OR have a male-male gender changer adapter to utilize a standard USB cable for charging. I was unable to find a USB 3.0 male type A to female microUSB 3.0 adapter. I was able to find it in the 'old' variety - but they seem to be very rare ducks.

or

2. Having 1 full sized USB 2.0 type A port AND 1 micro-USB 3.0 OTG type A port. In this scenario a cell phone charger could be used to charge - the micro-USB type A is backwards compatible. It could use USB device cables just like a Samsung Galaxy Note III. It would follow the USB device spec more closely. If you have a USB 3.0 device that you want to plug into the Pandora at USB 3.0 speeds, though, you will then need an adapter with female USB 3.0 on one end and male microUSB 3.0 on the other. Just like these:

http://www.amazon.com/Mall-Female-Micro-Adapter-Connector/dp/B00HLYDNL6

http://www.amazon.com/Black-Color-Micro-Samsung-Galaxy/dp/B00FNDXO0M

I'm inclined to go with option 2.

 What about option 3:

3. One full-sized USB 3.0 Standard-A port (which is backwards compatible with USB 2.0 and 1.x), and one micro-USB 3.0 OTG port (with SlimPort support). And maybe one mini-USB 1.1 OTG port too, just for backwards compatibility with the Pandora.

That would be my preferred option. If for some reason we cannot have two USB 3.0 ports, then change the micro-USB one to 2.0 OTG with SlimPort support.

 Not an option - at least not on OMAP5.  Only the USB 3.0 OTG can be used as OTG - and the specs for that require a microUSB 3.0 wide connector. 

That's where we get into the question of whether or not to break with USB specs and make our OTG port a full-sized type A port. With only one OTG port allowed, though, and it being restricted to the USB 3.0 side of the chip... it gets messy.

The ports available depend entirely on the SoC in the end. If it is OMAP5, like some speculate, there's probably 1xUSB3 OTG and 3xUSB2 host ports available. If the only port that can do OTG is also the only USB3 and the OTG part can only be used if it's micro-sized, I say make it micro-sized. I care more about gadget mode than maximum speed.

Exactly.

*************

A crazy thought occurred to me just now. Three ports exposed - two electrical.

Port 1a. microUSB 3.0 OTG wide port.

Port 1b. USB 3.0 type A port Electrically linked on the motherboard to Port 1a.

Port 2. USB 2.0 type A port

You should not put a device in ports 1a&1b at the same time, but it leaves all options open.

 

[Binky]

Port 1a. microUSB 3.0 OTG wide port. Port 1b. USB 3.0 type A port Electrically linked on the motherboard to Port 1a. Port 2. USB 2.0 type A port

I like this idea

Firstly it provides a full-size USB-A 3.0 port

Secondly, it could (potentially) fix the whoops-my-microUSB-port-broke-off problem - you could, in a pinch, use the full-size port to charge, since USB3 supports backwards power transmission (I think)

Could a software-controlled switch be implemented to choose between the two sockets?

 

[levi]

Why would it need to switch?


Edit: To stop you plugging a device into each port at the same time I guess, duh!

 

[Grench]

Port 1a. microUSB 3.0 OTG wide port. Port 1b. USB 3.0 type A port Electrically linked on the motherboard to Port 1a. Port 2. USB 2.0 type A port

 I like this idea

Firstly it provides a full-size USB-A 3.0 port

Secondly, it could (potentially) fix the whoops-my-microUSB-port-broke-off problem - you could, in a pinch, use the full-size port to charge, since USB3 supports backwards power transmission (I think)

Could a software-controlled switch be implemented to choose between the two sockets?

I don't see why not - although I'm not even sure how many of the leads would need to be switched. 
What would a USB 3.0 host controller do if two devices were plugged into it without a hub anyway?  No idea.

Why would it need to switch?

Edit: To stop you plugging a device into each port at the same time I guess, duh!

I'm not even sure this would be a real issue - could be though.

********************

Augmenting the crazy thought.

Power draw or inflow on port 1a (microUSB OTG) throws an internal hardware relay to disable port 1b. No software or external switches needed. I think that would work - can that be done?

 

[Binky]

Power draw or inflow on port 1a (microUSB OTG) throws an internal hardware relay to disable port 1b. No software or external switches needed. I think that would work - can that be done?

What about a slave device on port 1b and a host (non-power-drawing) device on 1b?

I don't see why not - although I'm not even sure how many of the leads would need to be switched.

Presumably not the power ones - you could charge a phone off one while using the other

What would a USB 3.0 host controller do if two devices were plugged into it without a hub anyway?

Get very confused, since two devices would be trying to send data on the same lines at once - so no coherent signal would get through

 

[Grench]

Power draw or inflow on port 1a (microUSB OTG) throws an internal hardware relay to disable port 1b. No software or external switches needed. I think that would work - can that be done?

 What about a slave device on port 1b and a host (non-power-drawing) device on 1b?

I don't see why not - although I'm not even sure how many of the leads would need to be switched.

 Presumably not the power ones - you could charge a phone off one while using the other

What would a USB 3.0 host controller do if two devices were plugged into it without a hub anyway?

Get very confused, since two devices would be trying to send data on the same lines at once - so no coherent signal would get through

So - you're right. The power lines aren't even an issue. Those could get isolated from each other using other means. It's the data lines.

I could see a scenario where a person could want to leave a micro-usb charger line plugged in and use the USB 3.0 type A port at the same time.

How about this: When a device is plugged into the USB 3.0 type A (full sized) port, the datalines for the microUSB 3.0 port get disabled.

mircoUSB 3.0 port always available for charging.

Type A USB 3.0 port is the 'primary' port - something plugged into it disables datalines on the microUSB.

Cake and eat it too?

 

[Binky]

What would happen  if somebody connected a host device to the USB3.0 fullA socket?

 

[Grench]

What would happen  if somebody connected a host device to the USB3.0 fullA socket?

Since it's electrically connected to a USB 3.0 OTG port... Hmmm... I'm betting it would work if using one a male-male adapter plugged into the female end of a USB 3.0 extension cable.

The way it's described, the host is whatever is on the "A" end of the cable. It should be possible to construct a cable with an 'A' connector on both ends - but one of them wired as if it were the 'B' end.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_On-The-Go

Oh - and looking at that page about the USB OTG specification, full sized type A ports ARE a valid target for OTG, though the primary purpose of having them be so is for printers to be able to 'stand alone' with a USB memory stick OR as a device to a computer.

If I understand it right, in theory, all of the ports could be OTG - just wire them sideways.

 

[DAP]

5 pages of arguing about USB connectors and nobody mentions USB 3.1 type-C connectors?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7652/usbif-updates-us-on-type-c-connector-demonstrates-usb-superspeed-31-transfers

advantages:

same size as USB 2.0 micro B

both master and slave use the same connector (cable is reversible).

Connector can be rotated 180 degrees and still be plugged in and work. (how many times do you have to flip a USB A connector before it will go in?)

10 Mbps.

It gets my vote.

 

[God Ginrai]

5 pages of arguing about USB connectors and nobody mentions USB 3.1 type-C connectors?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7652/usbif-updates-us-on-type-c-connector-demonstrates-usb-superspeed-31-transfers

advantages:

same size as USB 2.0 micro B

both master and slave use the same connector (cable is reversible).

Connector can be rotated 180 degrees and still be plugged in and work. (how many times do you have to flip a USB A connector before it will go in?)

10 Mbps.

It gets my vote.

We'll talk about it once it exists. Here's a quote from the article that you just linked:

The type C connector is still in development, and there aren't any current renderings or drawings, but what has been laid out are the design goals for the new connector design.

EDIT:

I'd prefer USB-B to a micro OTG port. Give me that and a full-size A for host and I'd be extremely happy.

-God Ginrai

 

[_wb_]

Two physical ports of which only one can be used at the same time seems like a bad idea to me. People would insert stuff in both anyway and get angry because it doesn't work. It also feels like there's a redundant hole in the case.

Why do you need super high speed for gadget mode? USB 2.0 can do 35 MB/s, which is probably faster than your SD cards anyway.

One full-size type A USB 3.0 and one micro-USB 2.0 OTG still makes most sense to me. It's important to be able to use a fast memory stick without an adapter.

 

[slaeshjag]

Question is; can any of the 2.0 hosts work as a OTG port?

 

[bzar]

According to any OMAP5 specs I've seen (still assuming this based on ongoing conversations), no. The only OTG port we'll have is probably also the only USB3 port.

 

[God Ginrai]

Two physical ports of which only one can be used at the same time seems like a bad idea to me. People would insert stuff in both anyway and get angry because it doesn't work. It also feels like there's a redundant hole in the case.

Why do you need super high speed for gadget mode? USB 2.0 can do 35 MB/s, which is probably faster than your SD cards anyway.

One full-size type A USB 3.0 and one micro-USB 2.0 OTG still makes most sense to me. It's important to be able to use a fast memory stick without an adapter.

You keep suggesting USB 2.0 OTG, but the OMAP 5 doesn't have that. It has 1 USB 3.0 OTG and 3 USB 2.0 Host. Also, I'm not quite sure what you are talking about ports not being able to be used at the same time...

-God Ginrai

 

[bzar]

^ Check Grench's posts, looking for the key word "electrical" to see what he was replying to.

 

[Neelix]

It seems clear to me that if The CPU will be the OMAP5 and we want both OTG and USB3,  we're going to need to use a wide micro-AB port.   In that case I would recommend that ED find a supplier of these cables for people wanting a full size USB3 connector.

It seems that it won't be possible to use both OTG gadget mode and USB 3 host mode at the same time.  

I'm thinking if we also want a full size USB port,  it will have to be a USB2 port.

- Neelix