Micro USB plz?

[slaeshjag]

We can't have USB 2.0 OTG and a 3.0 host port. The 3.0 port is the only OTG port the SoC supports.

 

[Neelix]

...  Assuming the SoC is in fact the OMAP 5 as theorised...   Has ED actually confirmed that yet? 

- Neelix

 

[slaeshjag]

There are no other likely candidate. And ED's intense defense of the OMAP5 is pretty telling

 

[Binky]

My ideal backside ports would be: - charging jack - full-size USB 2.0 + eSATAp - miniDP - wide microUSB 3.0 OTG + SlimPort

I would amend that to say:

• Same charging jack as on Pandora, PSP
• Full-size USB 2.0 + eSATAp without the 12V lines
• miniDP, HDMI or other small dedicated digital video out
• Wide microUSB3.0 otg, held down by proper through-hole tabs, with fancy video-out functionality if convenient to include

Also, if USB3 has separate USB2 and USB3 data lines, couldn't the USB3 lines be taken off to a separate socket, giving us one USB3.0 otg port and one USB2.0 otg port?

I think this is a horrible idea, since it would replicate the problem with the pandora's main USB port only supporting USB high-speed.

 

[bzar]

Binky: AFAIK, USB3 pins = USB2 pins + extra USB3-specific pins. So no.

 

[Binky]

Binky: AFAIK, USB3 pins = USB2 pins + extra USB3-specific pins. So no.

Good. That will stop anyone implementing such a stupid idea :wacko:

 

[hedwards]

Mini USB is an obsolete standard which had several design issues and was dropped by the USB standard organization (for good reasons).


I have never had issues with Micro-USBs myself, so I am not sure why you guys have had bad experience with them. Maybe you went for cheap shit ?

Most people who have problems with it are having problems with it in their cell phones, which are devices they are plugging in daily. The average person has only owned 3-4 cell phones w/ Micro USB, since the acceptance of it as a somewhat standard for cell phones is fairly new. So your sample size of phones you have not had issues with is likely to be rather small compared to the number of phones out there.

-God Ginrai

My Nexus One is only just now starting to have issues with the microUSB port. I think if the device had a better battery, that I wouldn't be having any trouble at all with it. And even now, it appears that the port is going to outlive the device as I'm starting to have some weird issues with the digitizer and random lock ups.

As long as you're mindful to put the jack in the correct side up and not force it, it might well outlive the Pyra. At any rate, if they opt to have the dedicated power cable, I see no reason why it's even going to be an issue. I rarely plug my Pandy in via the miniUSB.

 

[God Ginrai]

or just insert it directly to the USB 2.0+eSATAp port and get "only" 35MB/s.

Exactly. USB 2.0 host is more than adequate for a handheld device like the Pyra.

As such, we don't need to include a flimsy microUSB port for OTG. We should just make it a sturdy, stable USB-B 3.0 port.

My Nexus One is only just now starting to have issues with the microUSB port. I think if the device had a better battery, that I wouldn't be having any trouble at all with it. And even now, it appears that the port is going to outlive the device as I'm starting to have some weird issues with the digitizer and random lock ups.

As long as you're mindful to put the jack in the correct side up and not force it, it might well outlive the Pyra. At any rate, if they opt to have the dedicated power cable, I see no reason why it's even going to be an issue. I rarely plug my Pandy in via the miniUSB.

Just because you would not plug in a device with a large battery life daily does not mean other users will not. A lot of people will plug their devices in whenever they are not using them so that when they use it, they will have 100% battery, allowing them to use it for however long they need to.

Also, if the user loses their dedicated power cable, or goes to a country that uses a different plug (someone from the US visiting Europe, or vice versa), then they will likely power their device via USB. If we have a port that is more likely to break, then you increase the odds that the Pyra will become just a brick for the user.

-God Ginrai

 

[_wb_]

or just insert it directly to the USB 2.0+eSATAp port and get "only" 35MB/s.

Exactly. USB 2.0 host is more than adequate for a handheld device like the Pyra.


As such, we don't need to include a flimsy microUSB port for OTG. We should just make it a sturdy, stable USB-B 3.0 port.

I don't agree. That would not give us a way to get USB 3.0 speed when using the Pyra as a host. Also I don't think we have room for both a full size USB-A and USB-B port. And I don't think that micro-USB 3.0 is that flimsy, after all it is physically significantly larger than micro-USB 2.0.

 

[God Ginrai]

or just insert it directly to the USB 2.0+eSATAp port and get "only" 35MB/s.

Exactly. USB 2.0 host is more than adequate for a handheld device like the Pyra.

As such, we don't need to include a flimsy microUSB port for OTG. We should just make it a sturdy, stable USB-B 3.0 port.

 I don't agree. That would not give us a way to get USB 3.0 speed when using the Pyra as a host. Also I don't think we have room for both a full size USB-A and USB-B port. And I don't think that micro-USB 3.0 is that flimsy, after all it is physically significantly larger than micro-USB 2.0.

We don't need USB 3.0 speed for host. USB 2.0 speed is reasonably enough as it is.

Also, please do a little fact-checking next time before you make comments about what we have room for. The microUSB 3.0 port that you seem so adamant about is wider than both the width and the height of USB-B 3.0. If there wasn't enough room for USB-B 3.0, then there surely would not be enough room for the microUSB 3.0 port.

-God Ginrai

 

[Neelix]

We don't need USB 3.0 speed for host. USB 2.0 speed is reasonably enough as it is.


Also, please do a little fact-checking next time before you make comments about what we have room for. The microUSB 3.0 port that you seem so adamant about is wider than both the width and the height of USB-B 3.0. If there wasn't enough room for USB-B 3.0, then there surely would not be enough room for the microUSB 3.0 port.

-God Ginrai

So you would sacrifice the ability to have a USB3 OTG host because you don't like the connector?   That seems incredibly short-sighted, and self-centred. 

I also don't get what makes you think the USB-B connector is so much better.   My MIDI keyboard uses USB-B connector and the damn thing keeps falling out.  It may be nice and secure for stationary items,  but if you are moving your device around, it quickly loses its grip.  My phone on the other hand uses a micro-USB connector and that always requires a firm tug to unplug.   I would choose the micro-USB connector over the USB-B connector any day of the week.   I do think mini-USB was superior to micro-USB but we have to work with what we have.

- Neelix

 

[God Ginrai]

We don't need USB 3.0 speed for host. USB 2.0 speed is reasonably enough as it is.

Also, please do a little fact-checking next time before you make comments about what we have room for. The microUSB 3.0 port that you seem so adamant about is wider than both the width and the height of USB-B 3.0. If there wasn't enough room for USB-B 3.0, then there surely would not be enough room for the microUSB 3.0 port.

-God Ginrai

 So you would sacrifice the ability to have a USB3 OTG host because you don't like the connector?   That seems incredibly short-sighted, and self-centred.

Yes, because USB 2.0 Host is already adequate. You say that makes me short-sighted, I say that a blind demand for the faster speeds that USB 3.0 allows even though the connector is more likely to break is even more short-sighted. You want something that provides little extra benefit at the cost of quality of the connector.

I also don't get what makes you think the USB-B connector is so much better.   My MIDI keyboard uses USB-B connector and the damn thing keeps falling out.  It may be nice and secure for stationary items,  but if you are moving your device around, it quickly loses its grip.  My phone on the other hand uses a micro-USB connector and that always requires a firm tug to unplug.

Actually, you just proved my point. If the cable falls out, then the cable is not damaging the device. Because of that firm grip on the cable that microUSB has, it tugs the connector off the PCB, which is why these connections are prone to breaking.

EDIT: To further clarify, the fact that your phone tugs at the cable means that the port has a greater connection to your cable than the PCB, while the cable falling out of your MIDI keyboard means the port has a greater connection to the PCB than the cable, as it should.

-God Ginrai

 

[Neelix]

*shakes head*  The limited amount of movement I subject my keyboard to, is enough to loosen the connector so much that the USB-B connector on the keyboard tends to fall out while I'm transferring data,  not just when I'm moving the keyboard.  

Also the MicroUSB cable does in in fact come out cleanly  as it should if I do something stupid like walk away from the charger while it's plugged in.  (I should know,  I've managed to do that once or twice too)  In any case the answer to that is just to anchor the connector firmly to the PCB,   as Binky says, with through-hole tabs.

- Neelix

 

[comradekingu]

What are the two alternatives you are discussing, and is it the actual connector that breaks, or the solder joints holding it onto the pcb?  Is it the size of the outside of the connector or the pcb space you are discussing?

Its not like there cant be more options. Im in favour of dropping everything possible, dedicated power and video and kensington, in favour of usb ports.

They can be of various sizes and thus, you dont have to use the one you arent comfortable with, most of the time. Any other time, its only that micro3.0 that does 3.0 (short of a full one.)

Then there is that god awful draft 3.0 one, does that do anything special except being special?

 

[God Ginrai]

*shakes head*  The limited amount of movement I subject my keyboard to, is enough to loosen the connector so much that the USB-B connector on the keyboard tends to fall out while I'm transferring data,  not just when I'm moving the keyboard.

I'm afraid I am unclear on what you are suggesting. Is it the port or the cable falling out? If the port is falling out, especially that easily, then it is likely a manufacturing defect. If the cable is falling out that easily, then it is likely that one of the two pieces, the port or the cable, is non-standard and not the right size.

Also the MicroUSB cable does in in fact come out cleanly  as it should if I do something stupid like walk away from the charger while it's plugged in.  (I should know,  I've managed to do that once or twice too)  In any case the answer to that is just to anchor the connector firmly to the PCB,   as Binky says, with through-hole tabs.

 I'm not saying that it doesn't come out, but the resistance shows that it is pulling at the connector, which will slowly cause it to disconnect from the PCB.

What are the two alternatives you are discussing, and is it the actual connector that breaks, or the solder joints holding it onto the pcb?

I want eSATAp (USB 2.0 Host + eSATA), USB-B 3.0, and some mini-hdmi or mini-displayport. (although I need more information about displayport, I'm not sure I would hook that to my TV)

Neelix wants some alternative (not sure what) that involves microUSB so he can have access to USB 3.0 OTG.

Since we already have access to USB 2.0 Host which has decent transfer speeds, I see no reason to use a micro connector as opposed to a USB-B connector. A USB-B connector takes up less width on the back of the device, gives us USB slave (or gadget mode) which is the main reason people didn't want a USB-A 3.0 port (because the USB 2.0 connections are all host-only), and is a more sturdy connector than microUSB which means that it will last longer.

-God Ginrai

 

[comradekingu]

That is 4 ports total, which is within reason. Without knowing for sure what the SoC will be, what bus-es route to what, and where.

How about assembling a list of combo ports instead?

There are some power+ usb stuff

There is the usb esata combo | Full usb 2.0 (only?)

mhl which doesnt have a required port, usually 5 pin microusb, sometimes 11 (proprietary samsung)

MyDP/slimport |  microusb

Lightning Bolt/Dock port Im assuming | FullUSB, since its taking on video, there is extra space, but if there is only one fullport I prefer it over the esata combo

The latter being one that is not so known, so let me introduce it. Video, audio, power, and usb in one interface, royalty free. Backed by vesa, developed by TI and AMD.

Costs only a few dollars to implement. Costs a little bit of pcb space for an extra mux, as opposed to straight routing for video, but it also saves the space of the ports for those.

http://www.vesa.org/featured-articles/displayport-adds-dockport-extension-to-royalty-free-vesa-standard/  I need to read more myself

Edit: i like it more and more, since it provides multi monitor displays instead of SlimPort not supporting DisplayPort and USB-OTG at the same time. Modern SoCs have more io than you could ever put on separate headers and connectors, so it seems promising.

And a higher price can be commanded for a convergence tool, it sounds more like a computer if it has a full dock.

the vesa url says the connector is displayport, some sources show a mux option with a usb3.0 carrier port, and the latest amd project discovery tablet i cant find pictures of the ports for.

 

[God Ginrai]

That is 4 ports total, which is within reason. Without knowing for sure what the SoC will be, what bus-es route to what, and where.

It's been all but confirmed to be the OMAP5 in the Tegra K1 topic.

How about assembling a list of combo ports instead?

There are some power+ usb stuff

There is the usb esata combo | Full usb 2.0 (only?)

mhl which doesnt have a required port, usually 5 pin microusb, sometimes 11 (proprietary samsung)

MyDP/slimport |  microusb

Lightning Bolt/Dock port Im assuming | FullUSB, since its taking on video, there is extra space, but if there is only one fullport I prefer it over the esata combo

The latter being one that is not so known, so let me introduce it. Video, audio, power, and usb in one interface, royalty free. Backed by vesa, developed by TI and AMD.

Costs only a few dollars to implement. Costs a little bit of pcb space for an extra mux, as opposed to straight routing for video, but it also saves the space of the ports for those.

http://www.vesa.org/featured-articles/displayport-adds-dockport-extension-to-royalty-free-vesa-standard/  I need to read more myself

This Dockport thing looks interesting. But that would not be able to provide USB 3.0 slave (or gadget) mode, right? If so, it doesn't solve our problem. If it can, I would like to hear more about it. Also, it seems that TI is providing free samples for their Dockport chip. (http://www.ti.com/product/hd3ss2521) This is probably to encourage manufacturers to use it.

-God Ginrai

 

[comradekingu]

At the bottom of that page on the video he is plugging it into a mini-hdmi port on a laptop. Guess its time to man up on another TI pdf

Edit: http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/hd3ss2521.pdf  lists the typical device implementation with a mDP connector.  Very nice image on page 3

Its described as "Bi-Directional2:1 Switch for SuperSpeed USB andDisplayPort Signals"

 

[_wb_]

I don't agree. That would not give us a way to get USB 3.0 speed when using the Pyra as a host. Also I don't think we have room for both a full size USB-A and USB-B port. And I don't think that micro-USB 3.0 is that flimsy, after all it is physically significantly larger than micro-USB 2.0.

We don't need USB 3.0 speed for host. USB 2.0 speed is reasonably enough as it is.


Also, please do a little fact-checking next time before you make comments about what we have room for. The microUSB 3.0 port that you seem so adamant about is wider than both the width and the height of USB-B 3.0. If there wasn't enough room for USB-B 3.0, then there surely would not be enough room for the microUSB 3.0 port.

I don't see why we would need no USB 3.0 for host mode but we would need it for gadget mode. What do people use gadget mode for? To read/write data to/from their SD cards? In that case USB 2.0 speeds suffice, unless you have really fast SD cards. Did I miss something?

What do you use host mode for? To connect memory sticks, external hard disks, recording devices etc. Here the extra speed can be useful.

Also, in terms of space, you need to consider PCB area, not just the width and height of the visible port. Width is not the biggest issue. Anyway, unless you want to make the base very thick, I just don't see a way to fit a full size USB 3.0 Type B at all, even sideways. A full-size type A takes about 15x7x16mm (WxH). Type B 3.0 takes about 12x13x18mm. Micro-USB 3.0 takes about 13x3x5mm. That is, if I interpreted these drawings correctly: http://usbtips.com/usb-3-0-specifications-mechanical-layer/.

 

[God Ginrai]

I don't see why we would need no USB 3.0 for host mode but we would need it for gadget mode. What do people use gadget mode for? To read/write data to/from their SD cards? In that case USB 2.0 speeds suffice, unless you have really fast SD cards. Did I miss something?

Yes you did. As we've pointed out numerous times, the USB 2.0 provided by the OMAP5 is host only. The only way to get USB slave mode through the chip is from the USB 3.0 OTG. I will not argue that USB 2.0 speeds would not suffice for USB slave mode. However, it is something the SoC simply does not provide.

-God Ginrai