USB concerns - waste of space?

[_wb_]

Yes, the Pandora USB causes confusion because it does not work with USB 1.1 devices.

Something that looks like a USB 3.0 port but actually is a USB 2.0 would also cause confusion. People will complain that they don't get the speed they want, even if you say in huge letters on the first page of the manual that it's not a USB 3.0 port.

I understand the advantage of having a forward-compatible "motherboard", but I think it should not be exaggerated. The "motherboard" will not be that expensive, compared to the daughterboard. I think it's more important to make a consistent device, than to try to make a motherboard that will never need replacement.

I mean: who knows what we will have in the successor of the Pyra. Maybe it will have an e-ink display on the backside of the lid, one or two cameras, individual RGB backlights under all keys and buttons, force feedback. So maybe the motherboard will have to change anyway, and then it will have been very silly to have those unused UHS-II and USB3.0 data lines on the Pyra motherboard.

 

[slaeshjag]

^ As long as all that extra hardware is "optional" from a functionality standpoint, I can see people wanting to keep their motherboard if it has $100 worth of components on it. Not saying it will have, but there will be a fair amount of generic stuff on it. Apart from the cameras, nothing you mention would require change to the mainboard<->daughterboard connection.

 

[Neelix]

I'm wondering if it would make any kind of sense to run the necessary traces for a full USB3  port between the daughterboard socket and the physical port, but then populate a standard USB2 socket.  Then, if some time down the track a new daughterboard is created with an SoC that supports a separate USB3 port ED could upgrade entire units, replacing both boards,  and refurbishing the old motherboards with an upgraded USB port to be used in future upgrades. (with appropriate disclosure of course - perhaps offering a slight discount on the upgrade cost to use a refurbished board)

- Neelix

 

[thatgui]

Yes, the Pandora USB causes confusion because it does not work with USB 1.1 devices.

Something that looks like a USB 3.0 port but actually is a USB 2.0 would also cause confusion. People will complain that they don't get the speed they want, even if you say in huge letters on the first page of the manual that it's not a USB 3.0 port.

The situation is not exactly comparable as USB3 hardware will work, so they (as you mentioned) only complain that the port is too slow. So, some may complain - I say, let them complain - if they are not able to comprehend such simple things, it is their problem - not everything needs to be dumbed down to the least common denominator.If peoples interest in the concept of the Pandora/Pyra outlast the initial "get to know each other" phase directly after the purchase, they won't care that much. Look at the WiFi problem, a lot of complaints, but there weren't many vocal about selling the Pandora, because the WiFi is suboptimal. If people are really that upset about a wrong coloured port, they probably will sell their Pyra anyway as soon as a new device comes around the corner, that sparks their interest.

I understand the advantage of having a forward-compatible "motherboard", but I think it should not be exaggerated. The "motherboard" will not be that expensive, compared to the daughterboard. I think it's more important to make a consistent device, than to try to make a motherboard that will never need replacement.

I mean: who knows what we will have in the successor of the Pyra. Maybe it will have an e-ink display on the backside of the lid, one or two cameras, individual RGB backlights under all keys and buttons, force feedback. So maybe the motherboard will have to change anyway, and then it will have been very silly to have those unused UHS-II and USB3.0 data lines on the Pyra motherboard.

But we are not talking about the successor of the Pyra, we talk about an upgrade: So the only change will be the SoC itself (and RAM + NAND, but that should not be interesting in that case). With rather simple "investments" like a different connector and some "dead" traces the Pyra will be still in some aspects "up to date" then, if a new cpu board is designed. Giving it (possibly) another year or two with (in comparison to a successor) rather small costs as only the cpu boards needs a redesign, while the rest could stay the same.

 

[_wb_]

OK, I'm not opposed to it, as long as it does not add a significant cost (e.g. more than $2).

 

[ZetaNeta]

As i see, alot of people complain about what ports shall we put.

Like we previously had a idea of swappable layouts, i purpose a idea of putting swappable "back panel" modules.

I know that this may seriously affect the size of the console, but there is quite a chance that it wont do anything serious to the size.

SATA, HDMI, RJ45, USB... I guess even PS/2 ports can be made this way.

I would personally pay up to 300 more euros for a swappable ports and keyboard, and a proper rear camera.

(100 if they would at least leave the holes to solder my own port instead of the ones pyra originally got)

Does the Pyra really need 3 USB ports, and do those ports all need to come in different sizes? It seems a bit wasteful, don't those ports take up space on the board? Now, I'm mostly concerned about the Mini-USB port, because Mini-USB is dead. Nothing uses Mini-USB anymore, phones and cameras all have Micro-USB (or Lightning) and everything else uses full-size USB. So, I suggest removing the Mini-USB port, replace it with a second Micro-USB port if you really want to have 3 ports.

Mini-USB dead? Tell that to my 5 music players, smartphone, 3 devboards, USB>SATA adapter, cardreader, all my external HDDs and even a laptop.I got over 20 different Mini-USB cables round the house (including 2 3m ones), against just a single Micro-USB for my Sony camera.

Mini-USB will not die for next 10 generations of Pyras (or whatever ED will call it next time)

A µUSB dedicated for charging? ;_;

That's not so weird. It is the EU-wide standard for charging mobile phones.

Its just a standard. Manufacturers have agreed to adopt it.No one is enforcing you. And its little matter if you follow it.

And a charge-only port seems very stupid.

I am same feeling to this standard, as Linus is to ACPI.

Ak ok.

So maybe remove the option n°2 and add a rj45 connector instead ?

 For wired networking? I don't really see the use for that on a mobile handheld device. USB is more versatile. Plugging in both a standard keyboard and a standard mouse without needing a hub is useful to more people I think.

I really think that atleast 3 usb ports are "essential" on any desktop for me. "A keyboard, a boot USB, and a Wifi module"

But on pyra, i think 2 are ok. One for something "never take out" like a better WIFI, and another for a normal mouse. Everything else deserves a hub.

But, i find RJ45 as long as its atleast a Gigabit Ethernet one.

For the record, I do believe there will be internal(integrated) WiFi. It's the HDMI port I'm unsure about.

The specs page has "HDMI video out" without an asterisk, if that helps with the uncertainty.

I suppose an absence of an asterisk on "Huge battery for a long battery life (4200mAh)" is confirmation there won't be a larger capacity cell on the Pyra?
With a microSD, and another micro USB port, I'm doubtful we'll have a HDMI port on the Pyra. It will be available in the Docking Station though.

Not much people needs batteries to be backwards compatible with pandora, but more people will want the battery to be a Ah or 2 larger.

I am personally shouting with all my hands for a single MiniUSB and all rest being the full size USB.

I think i will have to superglue the docking station to my pyra if it will have more ports.

If you put a physical USB3 port on the board, users will expect it to work as USB3.

I agree. Having a blue-coloured USB3 connector that can't do USB3 is unintuitive and not consumer-friendly.

Ultimatly its EDs decision as he has to live with it if people start complaining. But I would rather loose some "huh, the advertised specs definately says that it is only USB 2, but its blue so it must be USB3" type of people if I could offer my customers full USB3 functionality one or two years down the road with a cpu board upgrade.

Quite a number of laptops i have got USB 3.0, and all of them are black.

Blue is like yellow was purposed for "always charging" ports on laptops.

Black plastic is cheaper, and will replace "ultra cool" blue ports, as soon as USB3 will get less attention from the marketing monsters :3

I vote for using black usb ports for USB 3.0.

I dont see USB 3 being a deal-breaking element here.

So, maybe a 1.1 Keyboard and a 2.0 Mouse should work on the Pyra ??

Or a 2.0 Stick and a 1.1 Mouse..

On the Pandora i ditnt used much a Mouse and Keyboard, but its good if it works..

You sound like having tons of USB 1.1 devices... Got a spare PS/2 keyboard?

 

[TrashyMG]

Quite a number of laptops i have got USB 3.0, and all of them are black. Blue is like yellow was purposed for "always charging" ports on laptops. Black plastic is cheaper, and will replace "ultra cool" blue ports, as soon as USB3 will get less attention from the marketing monsters :3 I vote for using black usb ports for USB 3.0. I dont see USB 3 being a deal-breaking element here.

The USB3 is going to be a micro-USB3 otg style connector.. it doesn't matter if it's black or not.. it's not a regular sized or shaped USB port.

 

[elvissteinjr]

You sound like having tons of USB 1.1 devices... Got a spare PS/2 keyboard?

You sound like you don't realize that most input devices are just USB 1.1 devices since they don't need the extra bandwidth and that's why they didn't work directly on the USB 2.0 port of the Pandora?

 

[ZetaNeta]

Quite a number of laptops i have got USB 3.0, and all of them are black. Blue is like yellow was purposed for "always charging" ports on laptops. Black plastic is cheaper, and will replace "ultra cool" blue ports, as soon as USB3 will get less attention from the marketing monsters :3 I vote for using black usb ports for USB 3.0. I dont see USB 3 being a deal-breaking element here.

The USB3 is going to be a micro-USB3 otg style connector.. it doesn't matter if it's black or not.. it's not a regular sized or shaped USB port.

Why everyone argues about the port color then?

You sound like having tons of USB 1.1 devices... Got a spare PS/2 keyboard?

You sound like you don't realize that most input devices are just USB 1.1 devices since they don't need the extra bandwidth and that's why they didn't work directly on the USB 2.0 port of the Pandora?

 

[WizardStan]

Why everyone argues about the port color then?

No one is arguing about the port colour.

 

[ZetaNeta]

Why everyone argues about the port color then?

No one is arguing about the port colour.

I didnt quote the whole discussion, but those 2 show it good enough:

Full sized USB3 ports are blue to make it obvious that it's a USB3 port not a USB2 port... If you put a physical USB3 port on the board, users will expect it to work as USB3.


- Neelix

I agree. Having a blue-coloured USB3 connector that can't do USB3 is unintuitive and not consumer-friendly.

 

[WizardStan]

And? What aren't you understanding?

 

[God Ginrai]

I didnt quote the whole discussion, but those 2 show it good enough:

Full sized USB3 ports are blue to make it obvious that it's a USB3 port not a USB2 port... If you put a physical USB3 port on the board, users will expect it to work as USB3.

- Neelix

I agree. Having a blue-coloured USB3 connector that can't do USB3 is unintuitive and not consumer-friendly.

I haven't read the whole thread, so I don't know the context for their posts. However, it seems obvious from the wording that they somehow got the idea that EvilDragon was going to use USB-3.0-A ports for the USB-2.0-A ports.

They were basically saying "We should not use USB 3.0-A ports because it would falsely advertise to the user that our USB-2.0-A port was USB 3.0-capable."

-God Ginrai

 

[WizardStan]

It wasn't EvilDragon's idea, it was just a suggestion, but that's the gist of it yeah.

 

[Grench]

I hate to think it, but this may have stemmed from a comment I made a while back.

Since the next generation of SD card slot, UHS-II uses more contacts than the current Pyra design, UHS-I, and that the next generation of USB ports, USB 3.0, require additional contacts, I suggested that the potential for these be included when designing the interconnect between the processor board and the peripheral board.

I.e. so that the current design for the connector between the two boards had adequate spare/unused pins to be future-proof for future SoC and peripheral board needs.

Soldering USB 3.0 sockets to a USB 2.0 only device is a bit of a silly extension of that.  I can see where they're going with the idea though - to future proof the peripheral board.  That way the next generation of SoC board would, in theory, be able to connect to and use the same peripheral board.

The catch with trying to do that, though, is that we have absolutely no idea what that next board will look like.

 

[God Ginrai]

Oh, you're right. That could be useful. So... if we used USB-3.0-A ports for the USB-host, then it may be possible to have multiple USB 3.0 ports if and when we could upgrade to a new daughter board that has support for multiple USB 3.0? If that's true, then I would support using the black USB-3.0-A ports that ZetaNeta mentioned, so that way they don't automatically make people assume they are USB 3.0.

-God Ginrai

 

[Yoyobuae]

Reminds me of this:

http://xkcd.com/644/

 

[Binky]

How expensive would it been to change over to making an updated mainboard (with more tracks, slightly different USB/SD connectors)?

I though dual-layer PCBs were pretty easy to make?

 

[slaeshjag]

The PCB itself is dirt cheap (maybe a dollar each in volume.) However, there needs a fair amount of components on it. Nikolaus should be able to give an estimate when the final BOM is finished for the interconnect board?

 

[ZetaNeta]

Reminds me of this:

http://xkcd.com/644/

A USB? LPT seems much easier to do!