But you were arguing in favor of not having 3.0 OTG (which is only possible through micro-USB), but to have a slave-mode-only 3.0 full-size type B.
Micro USB plz?
- Thread starter EssoAir
- Start date
God Ginrai
Godmaster
Yes, because we were already getting a USB-A 2.0 port, whether it was eSATAp or not. That seemed to be the consensus of everyone who posted in the topic was that we would at least have that much. So, having procured USB 2.0 host, I would much rather have a solid USB-B port for USB slave than a microUSB port, which has had issues.
-God Ginrai
Last edited by a moderator:
If a full-size USB3-B port were used, you would loose the the ability to do USB3 host (which can never be very convenient anyway, since you would need an adaptor or USB hub)
If microUSB USB3-AB is used instead, you have the worry of a connector that is known for its tendency to peel of circuit boards (unless being extra wide helps, and through-hole tabs are used)
bzar
A Commando
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro-USB#MICROWikipedia said:
The only cases in which a micro-usb socket has broken that I'm aware of were isolated (manufacturing error) or product specific (design error) ones. Is there a larger trend of breaking micro-usb sockets I'm not aware of?
I was against having the main video out in the micro-usb port because video cables tend to be significantly more rigid and heavy than regular USB cables and as such exert a lot more torque on the socket and PCB than they were probably designed for.
If there's some evidence (not "but bigger is better" gut feelings) that micro-usb sockets are a bad choice, I'd like to see it.
@God Ginrai: So you are saying that USB 3.0 speeds are not needed/useful in host mode, but they are needed badly enough in gadget mode to deserve a dedicated port with a big PCB footprint? Do you have a use case for that? To be honest I don't really see the need for gadget mode USB 3.0 speeds -- the only way I can imagine that to be useful is if you use the Pyra's internal NAND/eMMC as a big USB stick for your laptop.
I would imagine that a connector that is twice as wide would be more robust, but I don't know. It's certainly a concern to be taken into account. It's supposed to be a device that lasts many years, so unlike smartphones that are designed to be obsolete in a year, the device should be physically robust. Since the problem is not with the connector itself but rather its attachment to the PCB, I would think it is something that can be taken into account during design and be made as robust as possible.
Exactly.
I would imagine that a connector that is twice as wide would be more robust, but I don't know. It's certainly a concern to be taken into account. It's supposed to be a device that lasts many years, so unlike smartphones that are designed to be obsolete in a year, the device should be physically robust. Since the problem is not with the connector itself but rather its attachment to the PCB, I would think it is something that can be taken into account during design and be made as robust as possible.
God Ginrai
Godmaster
The only way to have USB slave is through the USB 3.0 interface on the OMAP5. How many times do I have to reiterate this to you? I could care less if we had USB slave on 2.0 or 3.0 speeds, but there is no USB 2.0 slave available. I'm honestly feeling slighted, because even though you are a staff member, it seems like you are completely ignoring what I am saying in my posts.
-God Ginrai
Neelix
Insecticidal Maniac
We're well aware of that, you're just completely missing the point. We want both USB slave, and USB 3 Host to be available to the user. Your recommended configuration doesn't allow for that.
- Neelix
- Neelix
comradekingu
Glowing ember
Its easier to follow wb's posts. Assume we need to be spoonfed and explain matters. When things are implied because they are apparent to you, that fails to be the case for us.
On the omap5432 soc, there are how many signals to be routed to what ports. Give the tradeoffs on each and explain what the best system is and why something is impossible. Start with the basics.
If we can have as little unpowered host and slave-only, or 1.1./2.0/3.0-only ports as possible i think that would lessen the confusion. The primary function should be to be able to plug things in and have them function as per normal.
On the omap5432 soc, there are how many signals to be routed to what ports. Give the tradeoffs on each and explain what the best system is and why something is impossible. Start with the basics.
If we can have as little unpowered host and slave-only, or 1.1./2.0/3.0-only ports as possible i think that would lessen the confusion. The primary function should be to be able to plug things in and have them function as per normal.
Last edited by a moderator:
So you'd rather have a big port that only gives you slave mode than a wide but otherwise small port that gives you both host and slave mode? Just because it is bigger and therefore presumably physically stronger? Even if it would make the device 5 mm thicker and eat up a significant portion of the board space?
comradekingu
Glowing ember
Tango PC on indiegogo using DockPort exclusivly. A dock, and then a slotloaded PC to go in it. Looks like docking options are becoming more available. Making a cable to fit a docking station is much easier than making the whole thing. Besides, if you already have that cable or can purchase it, thats easy right there.
Last edited by a moderator:
Neelix
Insecticidal Maniac
Yeah, but you need to have a handy docking station in order to use it. It's meant to be an easy to carry desktop computing solution, not a mobile computing solution. DockPort makes sense for Tango PC.
It doesn't make sense for the Pyra though, as it would make it a lot less versatile. I want to be able to use the accessory ports wherever I happen to be, (without having to lug around a docking station) not only when I'm at a pre-arranged location.
- Neelix
comradekingu
Glowing ember
Having a dockport instead of for example a designated power plug means more versatility. Power being similar, and then whatever extra on top of that.
When you are docked in the stationary sense is when extra extra ports are needed, and the dockport isnt the only port on the device.
I think the dockport can be switched to enable regular video out on displayport via a passive cable.
When you are docked in the stationary sense is when extra extra ports are needed, and the dockport isnt the only port on the device.
I think the dockport can be switched to enable regular video out on displayport via a passive cable.
Last edited by a moderator:
Nope.
Connector versatility is being able to connect to the maximum number of devices in the maximum number of possible situations.
That means standard connectors on the device itself.
If you want a dock, the combination of DP/HDMI, USB3.0 otg and eSATA should be enough for anybody.
comradekingu
Glowing ember
That isnt a dock though, unless you attach a usb3 dock, which isnt the equal amount of bandwidth. Power, video and communication cable at once just isnt sleek. For other uses you are down to less cables having the convenience of carrying more options.
Dockport is more ports for other things if you want to run off battery and do video on the dockport. I suppose if you want to charge meanwhile you can use the usb3 port for that, should be sufficient to power the pyra with screen off.
Thats two cables vs two cables. Also usb charging is more versatile because its easier to find rather than the right adaptor voltage and size. Tvs have usb power. Every ac-dc adapter lately is a usb port, i already have lots, and cables en masse to plug in between. Money saved for ac-dc adapter right there, and more environmental.
I suppose one of those dockport docks would be the equivalent to having a separate ac-dc adapter. In that case its 2 cables vs 1, and you get versatility from it having other ports on it.
Given limited space on the back of the device you run out of space to have ports on quite quickly. Routing less options to that area means utilizing less options on the SoC
Dockport is more ports for other things if you want to run off battery and do video on the dockport. I suppose if you want to charge meanwhile you can use the usb3 port for that, should be sufficient to power the pyra with screen off.
Thats two cables vs two cables. Also usb charging is more versatile because its easier to find rather than the right adaptor voltage and size. Tvs have usb power. Every ac-dc adapter lately is a usb port, i already have lots, and cables en masse to plug in between. Money saved for ac-dc adapter right there, and more environmental.
I suppose one of those dockport docks would be the equivalent to having a separate ac-dc adapter. In that case its 2 cables vs 1, and you get versatility from it having other ports on it.
Given limited space on the back of the device you run out of space to have ports on quite quickly. Routing less options to that area means utilizing less options on the SoC
Last edited by a moderator:
God Ginrai
Godmaster
You might be, I wasn't commenting on what you were aware of. _wb_'s posts, however, have continuously suggested that I wanted USB 3.0 speeds for USB slave and that I should just settle for USB 2.0 speed for USB slave, which is not possible with the SoC.
I don't understand how there can be any room for interpretation in my comments that the USB 2.0 on the OMAP5 is host only.
Both the microUSB and USB-B connectors would eat up significant board space, so that will be the case no matter which option we choose. As for making the device thicker, I don't mind that if it means my hardware is less likely to break. However, I would think that it would be possible to include USB-B without making the device thicker considering that the Pandora itself is thicker than any of the dimensions you were pulling for the USB-B 3.0 port from that link you mentioned earlier.
Whoa, whoa, whoa. I entertained the idea of dockport because I assumed it would be a possible solution to the USB 3.0 solution. There is no way I am supporting replacing the designated power outlet.
-God Ginrai
No, your position is that you want a full-size USB slave port at whatever speed and only USB 2.0 speed for USB host. My position is to have USB 3.0 OTG so we can have both slave and host at that speed.
And no, the board space needed for micro-USB 3.0 OTG and full-size USB-B is not the same. Micro-USB 3.0 takes 13mm x 5mm = 65mm^2. Full-size USB-B takes 12mm x 18mm = 216mm^2, which is more than 3 times the board area. In terms of volume it is even worse.
God Ginrai
Godmaster
Actually, I wanted eSATAp for the USB 2.0 host. And are you suggesting we chuck USB 2.0 host altogether? Everyone else in the topic has been suggesting this micro port in addition to a full size USB-A 2.0 host port.
Also, isn't that 18mm upwards? If so, that's not equivalent to boardspace.
-God Ginrai
Why did you even bother to respond if you couldn't be bothered to read my post? I've had my Nexus One since they went on the market in early 2010, it's been plugged and unplugged at least 1200 times at this point and the jack isn't likely to give out any time soon. In fact the rest of the device is going bad.
The point here is that the jack is perfectly fine for anybody that's taking any kind of reasonable care when inserting and ejecting the jack. I see no reason why a device that needs to be plugged in even less frequently and that has other connectivity options for power and moving files needs to go with an obsolete jack.
God Ginrai
Godmaster
I did read your post. You said that you would not be having problems with your microUSB port if the device had a better battery. There is no way that the battery can effect the structural integrity of the microUSB port. Therefore, it must be because given a better battery life, you would plug your device in less. Hence my argument that even with a better battery life, there would still be people who would plug it in all the time.
You should really think things through before you hurl an accusation like that at someone. You might have read my response, but you obviously didn't think about why I made that response.
-God Ginrai
Last edited by a moderator:
I feel that the most important thing to get right here is the standardisation of connectors.
Actually, that's come across as being quite strongly worded - I don't mean to sound angry or anything. I'm just trying to construct principles to work from.
---
It suggests that with proper care and attention, robust microUSB implementations are possible.
- The Pandora has a ridiculous oddball video-out (+other stuff) connector that literally took years to become usable to any but the skilled solderer
- The USB-A host port irritates every other user with its full-speed only, no-empty-hubs requirements
- The USB otg port is great except you can't get miniUSB-A cables any more because they're obsolete
- People get confused by the mess with TRRS headset jacks (Apple's imitators vs the old standard)
- Chargers for the barrel-jack DC-in socket are trivial to find,
- as are devices with USB-A plugs,
- and headphones with a 3.5mm stereo jack plug.
- and miniUSB-B cables
- Avoid the EXT connector
- Avoid trying to do USB host with a full-size B port
- Avoid obscure connectors like dockport
- Ensure that every connector is electrically and logically capable of everything the user expects it do do.
Actually, that's come across as being quite strongly worded - I don't mean to sound angry or anything. I'm just trying to construct principles to work from.
---
This is good.
It suggests that with proper care and attention, robust microUSB implementations are possible.
Similar threads
