Goodbye DCS Remote announced at York - Bummer

Are  all the HO DCC companies dropping their remotes for a phone or an iPad?

Lots of discussion about tablets, WiFi, apps, et al. However, the root cause seems to have been largely ignored. The basis of this is most likely availability of the components to manufacture the remotes. Redesign, maybe; but then you're right back on the obsolescence clock. Beat up MTH all you want, but they don't make the chips.

Lionel's Legacy remote is admittedly newer. Hence, it isn't obsolete yet.  Just a matter of time. 

I like the MTH remote too. But, how long have we been complaining about the thumbwheel? FWIW, I haven't figured out how I will deal with these issues on my own layout. 

bigkid posted:

Doug-Sr posted:

I have not found a way to run conventional  engines with any  phone or pads yet and i run both s and o conventional and and command with the remote

Wiu and the app don't support conventional mode the way the tiu did? Ie controlling conventional via track voltage set by the tiu via the remote? 

Yes the DCS APP does offer support for conventional control just like the remote. I'm not sure if it's included in the standard or premium upgrade but I know that it is not included in the free version.

Dave45681 posted:

Is that a handheld? (running for cover )

-Dave

How big are your hands?

OK, it would be much easier to create something that uses the LEGACY remote to control DCS engines. An Arduino would do:  Just read the serial stream from the Legacy base, figure out what you want the Legacy command to represent in DCS-world, and then use Mark's system to send the DCS command to the TIU.

 Cost would be about $10 in parts I think.

This is ASSUMING MTH still builds in the capability to control the TIU with a wired connection or the 905.8MHz radio signal.  That may not be the case if they revise the TIU along with ditching the remote.

Berkshire President posted:

Rider Sandman posted:

My layout is 100% Legacy and I suspect Lionel will eventually get to the same place. Building new software apps for use on common devices will be orders of magnitude less expensive than continuing to build physical remotes with chipsets that are 20 years old. I would much rather have them spend their engineering and financial resources on new product innovations instead of keeping ancient hardware alive. Given the shrinking customer base, it seems to make good sense to me. 

So.....you're OK with something that profits Lionel or MTH exclusively while you receive less choices and fewer options as a result?

ABSOLUTELY.  I'M DEFINITELY "OK" WITH THEM MAKING PROFIT ON SOMETHING THAT ALLOWS THEM TO FREE UP RESOURCES FOR SOMETHING ELSE THAT I VALUE MORE - e.g., NEW TOOLING OR ADDITIONAL FEATURES.

And you don't think that Lionel or MTH has ANY obligation to continue to support parts of their operating systems that they sold to us (and we bought into) 15-20 years ago?

THEY ARE SUPPORTING IT, THEY ARE JUST DOING SO VIA A DIFFERENT INTERFACE.  MY SENSE IS THE NUMBER OF COMPANIES STILL SUPPORTING 1998-ERA TECHNOLOGIES EXACTLY AS THEY SOLD THEM BACK THEN IS VERY SMALL.  MICROSOFT WILL STILL SUPPLY A VERSION OF EXCEL THAT WILL OPEN YOUR 20-YEAR-OLD SPREADSHEET, BUT THEY WON'T SUPPORT OFFICE '95.  

If so, I strenuously (but respectfully) disagree.

FAIR ENOUGH.  ALSO RESPECTFULLY, MY ONLY POINT IS THAT GIVEN THE MONOTONICALLY DECREASING MARKET, IF EITHER MTH OR LIONEL CAN DISCONTINUE PRODUCTION OF A DEVICE WITH ANCIENT (AND THEREFORE EXPENSIVE) CHIPSETS IN FAVOR OF DEVICES MOST FOLKS HAVE IN THEIR POCKETS AND DOING SO MEANS I CAN GET MORE CONTENT IN OTHER AREAS, I'M COOL WITH IT.  I UNDERSTAND IF OTHERS DISAGREE.  ONE POINT THAT SEEMS TO REALLY GET LOST IN THESE DISCUSSIONS IS THE COST OF COMPONENT OBSOLESCENCE.   I SPENT YEARS AS A POWERTRAIN HARDWARE ENGINEER.  THE IDEA THAT ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS ARE "TOOLING" AND THEREFORE ALWAYS AVAILABLE AT LOW COSTS ISN'T REALITY.

Berkshire President posted:

Rider Sandman posted:

My layout is 100% Legacy and I suspect Lionel will eventually get to the same place. Building new software apps for use on common devices will be orders of magnitude less expensive than continuing to build physical remotes with chipsets that are 20 years old. I would much rather have them spend their engineering and financial resources on new product innovations instead of keeping ancient hardware alive. Given the shrinking customer base, it seems to make good sense to me. 

So.....you're OK with something that profits Lionel or MTH exclusively while you receive less choices and fewer options as a result?

And you don't think that Lionel or MTH has ANY obligation to continue to support parts of their operating systems that they sold to us (and we bought into) 15-20 years ago?

If so, I strenuously (but respectfully) disagree.

Things become obsolete in many kinds of things. I have a whirlpool tub, bathtubs being something you tend to keep a long time, that when I needed a new faucet base they told me they discontinued the model 5 years after I bought it and told me they stopped stocking that part right then. I have a high end stove, again something people tend to hold on for a long time, and parts for it are getting to be unavailable (fortunately some can be subbed for,others there are places that specialize in obsolete parts). The only reason we can still get parts for post war engines and the like is the parts were often common between different units and a stockpile of parts were out there, plus when old units were remade parts were made as well upping what is out there. Given that for example Lionel stopped making new tmcc remotes when they stopped making the unit and eventually stopped carrying them, nothing new. Lionel likely would tell a tmcc user to upgrade to legacy, mth will tell you to update to wiu and wifi dcs.

Even with cars parts can have a limited life, while many parts are available long after the car was made, thanks to parts being used in many car models for many years, smaller run models can have parts no longer available not long after they cease production (cars of course have the advantage that third party parts are out there, unlike toy trains. As much as I sympathize with the idea, the idea of things being available forever or running forever just isn't the reality with anything above the level of relatively simple things, some things happen to be like that, many are not.

In the most recent notch 6 interview with Howard Hitchcock.  He acknowledges that they too will be making a change.  It didn't sound like the were going to go out of the way to phase out the legacy remote but did acknowledge that the technology was outdated and more cab-2's would'nt be produced.  the cab 1 or 1L was safe for now.   The writing is on the wall.  I like the latest and greatest Legacy and DCS has to offer.   So if  I want to stay on top of the systems and learning the tricks and ins and outs I'll have to start adapting.    I love the legacy and DCS remote.  I wish they didn't have to go away.  Its going to be a tough transition but i look forward to seeing what a future Legacy app may look like.   I have the DCS premium app and its ok but it feels pretty clunky to me.  In Mth's defense i think the apps in general feel awkward compared to the remote.   The DCS app isn't bad however it feels to me like i have to move around to much to get access to things i use.   The remotes definitely feel more fluid at least to me.   I have spoken to folks who love the app though.   Maybe i just need to commit to using it and learn it well.  Times are changing and i hate to see how much resistance the big two get any time they try to stay with the times.  Its sad really.   

I find it difficult to accept the argument that components become unavailable.  Seems to me that there is always something that can accomplish the same thing.  Unlike the app, MTH doesn't need to put money into developing the remote.  I have 2 WIUs and 4 remotes at my layout, and rarely use the app. I want to run trains.

I’m gonna make my own remote...

RJR posted:

I find it difficult to accept the argument that components become unavailable.  Seems to me that there is always something that can accomplish the same thing.  Unlike the app, MTH doesn't need to put money into developing the remote.  I have 2 WIUs and 4 remotes at my layout, and rarely use the app. I want to run trains.

 

Politely, but I can assure you that the number of 90’s era components that are either not available or not available in their inititial form factors or cost points is massive. “Something that can accomplish the same thing”, even if available, requires a redesign of a 20-year-old controller in the best case. The idea that one could take a 90’s era circuit board and find a complete set of ASICs, chipsets, surface mount and sticklead devices, and mechanical components (e.g., button/switch  contacts) to mount to it in a cost effective and seamless manner some 20+ years later simply isn’t reality whether one accepts it or not. Keep in mind model railroading command and control was largely custom protocols.  The recent implementation of Bluetooth and WiFi is being phased in so that going forward there will always be “something that can accomplish the same thing” without the need to replace and update custom and expensive hardware and software protocols. 

Daniel J. Gonzalez posted:

Dave45681 posted:

SGP posted:

For the record, if you can have someone help you get the App on your tablet you don't need wireless internet in your home. My understanding is that the MTH WiFi device has the ability to send out its own WiFi signal independently just for your trains. Others with more experience can chime in where that switch is located or if there is an easier way to download the App to your tablet.

MTH set this up so that it doesn't matter what devices you currently use in your life, just grab a second hand tablet around the same cost of the remote if your using WiFi and your good to go.

Correct, of course.  I meant to imply the internet connection was needed in order to get the App on the devices, but your right that they can talk directly to the DCS WiFi unit once the App is installed.

As to the discussion of abandoning the already engineered remote, it has been suggested (or even stated as a hard fact, but I can't quote a source off the top of my head) that it is a parts availability issue.  It's will not be feasible to continue "just ordering more" of the same thing.  Considering the TIU/Remote first came out in 2002 (and was in development for at least 2+ years before that most likely), it's not hard to believe some of the 16+ year old parts are no longer available from the tech companies that actually make the chips.

Therefore, continuing to offer the remote would require at least some level of a re-design.  That is what MTH is trying to avoid.

-Dave

I have read that on this forum before and that might be true BUT!!! to your logic, those said discontinued components have either gotten cheaper to manufacture or a cheaper alternative has been created to replace it.

Electronics get cheaper, smaller, and then replaced with something even cheaper and even smaller and so on and so on.

So MTH doesn't want to re-engineer the remote with modern components does indeed make sense but don't blame the parts, they can be found one way or another. That costs prohibit those changes is a different deal of course.

At this year's LCCA meeting in Chicago in July, I heard Lionel's president, Howard Hitchcock, say that for small businesses like model train companies, dealing with parts obsolescence is a complicated and costly issue. Unlike the Apples of the world who have components made to their specifications, the train companies have to work with whatever components are currently being made. Adaptations are possible to a certain extent, but, at some point, when too many key components no longer exist, you just can't make the product without making the investment to totally re-engineer it. This will likely happen to Legacy somewhere along the line; however, at this time, Lionel has produced a large inventory of Legacy items, including remotes, and will be able to continue to supply the market for a number of years.

Daniel J. Gonzalez posted:

shorling posted:

I like the remote but IMHO the future is higher tech @ lower cost.  Why do I think that: because most everyone likes lower cost startup and APPs attract future generations.  It takes less hardware to run apps: ie, no remote means lower cost.  Look at the competition.  IMHO they're on the way to bluetooth  No hardware to buy at least for now, just use your phone, tablet, etc to run your engine.

No lower cost here, the TIU/WIU combo will be similarly priced to the TIU/Remote combo, exempt now you have to add a $25 fee for the premium features and a smart device of some sort. Technically speaking it will be more and before you say it, yes, we all should have phones.

Competition still has a remote and has not said they will be removing it (Legacy)

Mr. Kunkle at York looked me in the eye and said they are committed to the remote and have plans to keep it and there are no discussions to remove it.  

As I said, they could give us the choice of purchasing a new “Premier Plus” upscale remote as an alternative. If you run super expensive trains, I,m sure a great remote would be worth the price of a diesel locomotive.  We haven’t even touched on those without nimble fingers or challenged vision.   If we are not there yet, most of us are within a measurable period.  

This should be a hobby we don’t outgrow.  “ Operating trains make men boys, and boys men”.  Let’s not forget it’s value to us.

Professor Chaos posted:

Dave45681 posted:

Is that a handheld? (running for cover )

-Dave

How big are your hands?

OK, it would be much easier to create something that uses the LEGACY remote to control DCS engines. An Arduino would do:  Just read the serial stream from the Legacy base, figure out what you want the Legacy command to represent in DCS-world, and then use Mark's system to send the DCS command to the TIU.

 Cost would be about $10 in parts I think.

This is ASSUMING MTH still builds in the capability to control the TIU with a wired connection or the 905.8MHz radio signal.  That may not be the case if they revise the TIU along with ditching the remote.

Would be nice if someone could do this. I know I'd be in for sure! 

RJR posted:

I find it difficult to accept the argument that components become unavailable.  Seems to me that there is always something that can accomplish the same thing.  Unlike the app, MTH doesn't need to put money into developing the remote.  I have 2 WIUs and 4 remotes at my layout, and rarely use the app. I want to run trains.

 

Something like the DCS remote is not made from commonly available parts just wired together differently. For example, the DCS thumbwheel (an electro-mechanical item) is custom made for MTH, it isn't generic that a lot of companies use.The circuit board(s) are custom made, and likely they could use ASIC's in there that are custom as well. I have never opened a dcs remote, but i would bet my description is accurate. With a relatively low vume sales item like dcs, how many replacement remotes do they sell? How many new dcs units do they sell each year that require manufacturing new tiu w remote vs sold from inventory. Kind of like bto, vendors on custom products require minimum size runs, and it is not unlikely given how small demand is for replacement remotes (new sales w remote likely are still in inventory), it doesn't pay, and eventually the vendor will not continue on with waiting for an order, and getting a new vendor is not cost justified...that is likely why components can become unavailable, it isnt like buying memory or a cpu chip or eeprom where they are plentiful.

I haven't been a fan of MTH generally because of the Proto-1 debacle a decade++ ago.  In fact, I sold off all my MTH locs 5-6 years ago (except a very unusual PS-1 loc - converted to TMCC) because I wanted just one system to run my trains with.

So, as the saying goes, I no longer have a "dog in this fight" over the form of DCS.

But, as an observer, I will say that it's really probable that MTH's move is too early in the evolution of devices. 

For ME, I like the tactile, one-hand remote (Legacy provides that with - IMO - a better/more reliable system).   I recently picked up a couple of LionChiefPLUS locs, and, in conjunction with Legacy, WiFi, B/T Lionel now provides a superior train-running environment at a VERY reasonable cost.

Not all users - including adults AND kids adept at technology - will want to abandon the hand-held.

Move on if a manufacturer is doing something you don't like.

rthomps posted:

I haven't been a fan of MTH 

 

I pretty much stopped reading right here.

Rider Sandman posted:

RJR posted:

I find it difficult to accept the argument that components become unavailable.  Seems to me that there is always something that can accomplish the same thing.  Unlike the app, MTH doesn't need to put money into developing the remote.  I have 2 WIUs and 4 remotes at my layout, and rarely use the app. I want to run trains.

 

Politely, but I can assure you that the number of 90’s era components that are either not available or not available in their inititial form factors or cost points is massive. “Something that can accomplish the same thing”, even if available, requires a redesign of a 20-year-old controller in the best case. The idea that one could take a 90’s era circuit board and find a complete set of ASICs, chipsets, surface mount and sticklead devices, and mechanical components (e.g., button/switch  contacts) to mount to it in a cost effective and seamless manner some 20+ years later simply isn’t reality whether one accepts it or not. Keep in mind model railroading command and control was largely custom protocols.  The recent implementation of Bluetooth and WiFi is being phased in so that going forward there will always be “something that can accomplish the same thing” without the need to replace and update custom and expensive hardware and software protocols. 

But to your point, how expensive was a pc back then vs today. How expensive is a usb mouse today vs 20 years ago. Both of those devices received extensive r&d and thanks to it, not only did new technologies form, those "older" technologies got better and cheaper. If MTH is doing this to save money, I think some of us feel it is not exactly correct, if they invest just as much money as the app, they may come up with not only a new design but a better and cheaper one at that, just like those 90's products you speak of. 

Don't tell me "thumbwheels" are getting hard to come by when Dell gives you a free usb mouse with scrollwhell when you buy a $350 PC.

LONG LIFE THE REMOTE! (Sorry lmao I couldn't help my self, I'ma huge Star Wars and Star Trek fan so I just feel like this is Darth vs Luke or Shatner vs Khan!! 😂

In any case, no matter how this goes, I think there should be an alternative for those that don't want to use WiFi.

Goodnight everyone!

Daniel J. Gonzalez posted:

Don't tell me "thumbwheels" are getting hard to come by when Dell gives you a free usb mouse with scrollwhell when you buy a $350 PC.

Dell doesn't build the mouse, it's made by someone else who probable made a 1000 unit just today for dell or other manufactures. That scroll wheel is used in more than one style of mouse as well, it's easy for the 3rd party manufacture to build or buy 100,000 units because the know they will be used.

The MTH thumb wheel is custom made specifically for MTH, no other manufacture on planet Earth uses that part. Manufactures  of these parts eventually say order more now or you'll be finding someone else to make this part for you.

Daniel J. Gonzalez posted:

Rider Sandman posted:

RJR posted:

I find it difficult to accept the argument that components become unavailable.  Seems to me that there is always something that can accomplish the same thing.  Unlike the app, MTH doesn't need to put money into developing the remote.  I have 2 WIUs and 4 remotes at my layout, and rarely use the app. I want to run trains.

 

Politely, but I can assure you that the number of 90’s era components that are either not available or not available in their inititial form factors or cost points is massive. “Something that can accomplish the same thing”, even if available, requires a redesign of a 20-year-old controller in the best case. The idea that one could take a 90’s era circuit board and find a complete set of ASICs, chipsets, surface mount and sticklead devices, and mechanical components (e.g., button/switch  contacts) to mount to it in a cost effective and seamless manner some 20+ years later simply isn’t reality whether one accepts it or not. Keep in mind model railroading command and control was largely custom protocols.  The recent implementation of Bluetooth and WiFi is being phased in so that going forward there will always be “something that can accomplish the same thing” without the need to replace and update custom and expensive hardware and software protocols. 

But to your point, how expensive was a pc back then vs today. How expensive is a usb mouse today vs 20 years ago. Both of those devices received extensive r&d and thanks to it, not only did new technologies form, those "older" technologies got better and cheaper. If MTH is doing this to save money, I think some of us feel it is not exactly correct, if they invest just as much money as the app, they may come up with not only a new design but a better and cheaper one at that, just like those 90's products you speak of. 

Don't tell me "thumbwheels" are getting hard to come by when Dell gives you a free usb mouse with scrollwhell when you buy a $350 PC.

LONG LIFE THE REMOTE! (Sorry lmao I couldn't help my self, I'ma huge Star Wars and Star Trek fan so I just feel like this is Darth vs Luke or Shatner vs Khan!! 😂

In any case, no matter how this goes, I think there should be an alternative for those that don't want to use WiFi.

Goodnight everyone!

You do realize that “PC” and “USB” - “personal computer” and “universal serial bus” - have been made in millions -perhaps billions - of copies, right?  The ASIC chipsets in a model railroading controller have been produced, by comparison, maybe - maybe - in the tens of thousands. Point to a thumbwheel for a mouse that fits - without redesign - to the DCS handheld control. Again, does a business the size of MTH spend its resources redisgning a 20-year-old interface to accept currently available commodity components or does it invest in other product improvements? They seem to have made a calculated decision based on the business case before them. 

H1000 posted:

rthomps posted:

I haven't been a fan of MTH 

 

I pretty much stopped reading right here.

Cool.  

Wow.

I was at the DCS dinner and what I heard must have been completely ignored. MTH stated their focus in on the Wifi and tablet/phone apps but would continue to manufacture and support the DCS remote as long as they could. Component obsolescence is the factor where MTH flatly stated if they cannot find something to do the job to make the DCS remotes in the future then MTH would be finished with the DCS remote.

I thought their discussion was fair and honest. There is supposed to be another shipment of remotes and parts coming in according to MTH. How did no one else hear this? 

If they stopped making DCS today there is still enough product out there to keep working for many years and likely beyond.

This sky is falling and focusing on the negative is beyond me.

The remotes are there and MTH is listening to their customers so go run some trains and enjoy the hobby.

Daniel J. Gonzalez posted:

I think there should be an alternative for those that don't want to use WiFi.

 

You can still run you trains conventionally. No remote of any type required.

Captaincog posted:

Wow.

I was at the DCS dinner and what I heard must have been completely ignored. MTH stated their focus in on the Wifi and tablet/phone apps but would continue to manufacture and support the DCS remote as long as they could. Component obsolescence is the factor where MTH flatly stated if they cannot find something to do the job to make the DCS remotes in the future then MTH would be finished with the DCS remote.

I thought their discussion was fair and honest. There is supposed to be another shipment of remotes and parts coming in according to MTH. How did no one else hear this? 

If they stopped making DCS today there is still enough product out there to keep working for many years and likely beyond.

This sky is falling and focusing on the negative is beyond me.

The remotes are there and MTH is listening to their customers so go run some trains and enjoy the hobby.

So wait.. MTH didn't announce the cancellation of the original remote!!!!

I think the OP should please re-title the thread, it's rather misleading.

H1000, I ran conventional solely, from 1941 to 2002 (or whenever DCS was released).  I had my layout wired to give max control over locos, but no way could it compare with the operational flexibility of DCS--operating locos directly without regard to where they might be on the layout.

We now have a question of fact!  Did or did not MTH announce the forthcoming demise of the remote?

rthomps posted:

H1000 posted:

rthomps posted:

I haven't been a fan of MTH 

 

I pretty much stopped reading right here.

Cool.  

Yeah, I kinda forgot to make my regular visit to the Legacy & LC forums to rip on their products that I actually own and use everyday. Let me know when they get that Bluetooth app to run more than one engine at a time.

H1000 posted:

Captaincog posted:

Wow.

I was at the DCS dinner and what I heard must have been completely ignored. MTH stated their focus in on the Wifi and tablet/phone apps but would continue to manufacture and support the DCS remote as long as they could. Component obsolescence is the factor where MTH flatly stated if they cannot find something to do the job to make the DCS remotes in the future then MTH would be finished with the DCS remote.

I thought their discussion was fair and honest. There is supposed to be another shipment of remotes and parts coming in according to MTH. How did no one else hear this? 

If they stopped making DCS today there is still enough product out there to keep working for many years and likely beyond.

This sky is falling and focusing on the negative is beyond me.

The remotes are there and MTH is listening to their customers so go run some trains and enjoy the hobby.

So wait.. MTH didn't announce the cancellation of the original remote!!!!

I think the OP should please re-title the thread, it's rather misleading.

I stand by my original title for the thread.  I have been in contact with Andy (V.P of Marketing for MTH). We discussed the remote as the one being referred to here.  I asked for permission to post his 5 point reply.  MTH has not given me permission to post it. They said in the absence of replacement parts available and the potential development cost it is a business decision.  This is not a rumor.  That’s what took me to MTH to confirm before posting.  Have run a business for 40 years and know the value of accuracy. 

Bottom line is that a remote should be developed if they want to satisfy remote users.  If you have an 19 year old design, it maybe time to evolve. This is the proverbial fork in the road.  That’s all.  In the end the market will dictate.

H1000 posted:

Captaincog posted:

Wow.

I was at the DCS dinner and what I heard must have been completely ignored. MTH stated their focus in on the Wifi and tablet/phone apps but would continue to manufacture and support the DCS remote as long as they could. Component obsolescence is the factor where MTH flatly stated if they cannot find something to do the job to make the DCS remotes in the future then MTH would be finished with the DCS remote.

I thought their discussion was fair and honest. There is supposed to be another shipment of remotes and parts coming in according to MTH. How did no one else hear this? 

If they stopped making DCS today there is still enough product out there to keep working for many years and likely beyond.

This sky is falling and focusing on the negative is beyond me.

The remotes are there and MTH is listening to their customers so go run some trains and enjoy the hobby.

So wait.. MTH didn't announce the cancellation of the original remote!!!!

I think the OP should please re-title the thread, it's rather misleading.

No reference to DCS going away.  Only the 18 year old remote.

Bryant Dunivan 111417 posted:

H1000 posted:

Captaincog posted:

Wow.

I was at the DCS dinner and what I heard must have been completely ignored. MTH stated their focus in on the Wifi and tablet/phone apps but would continue to manufacture and support the DCS remote as long as they could. Component obsolescence is the factor where MTH flatly stated if they cannot find something to do the job to make the DCS remotes in the future then MTH would be finished with the DCS remote.

I thought their discussion was fair and honest. There is supposed to be another shipment of remotes and parts coming in according to MTH. How did no one else hear this? 

If they stopped making DCS today there is still enough product out there to keep working for many years and likely beyond.

This sky is falling and focusing on the negative is beyond me.

The remotes are there and MTH is listening to their customers so go run some trains and enjoy the hobby.

So wait.. MTH didn't announce the cancellation of the original remote!!!!

I think the OP should please re-title the thread, it's rather misleading.

I stand by my original title for the thread.  I have been in contact with Andy (V.P of Marketing for MTH). We discussed the remote as the one being referred to here.  I asked for permission to post his 5 point reply.  MTH has not given me permission to post it. They said in the absence of replacement parts available and the potential development cost it is a business decision.  This is not a rumor.  That’s what took me to MTH to confirm before posting.  Have run a business for 40 years and know the value of accuracy. 

Bottom line is that a remote should be developed if they want to satisfy remote users.  If you have an 19 year old design, it maybe time to evolve. This is the proverbial fork in the road.  That’s all.  In the end the market will dictate.

Fair enough, good argument!

The remote will cease when it no longer becomes feasible to produce and that decision will come from MTH whenever it comes. No finite date, just don't depend on it sticking around forever.

Interesting that television makers still include a remote in all their TV sets, no matter how whizzy and modern.  Why do you think that is?  Why not just include a free downloadable app from the internet? I think the answers to these questions are fairly obvious.  A nice television remote is a lot easier to use than an app.  Example being my smart phone or tablet goes dark every 5-15 minutes without being used,  unless I'd like to have to recharge it a bazillion times a day. 

I like my smart phone and I use it all the time (well, an hour or two a day) to read email, texts, get news, weather, even get phone calls,  etc., but I don't see the attraction of making it the ONLY way of operating toy trains.  That's what MTH is now doing with their train sets (a big mistake, I think) and now MTH is suggesting this limitation for all of their trains in the future.  You want a physical remote?  Build one yourself .

Truth in advertising, I like the fact that all LionChief and LionChief+ locos come with their own remotes, and now will operate with their app by Bluetooth, or,  for the LC+, in conventional.  It's nice to have options as a consumer.  If Lionel stops making any physical remotes they will lose some consumers who like the physical remote. I'd rather give a 3 or 5 year old a Lionel Universal Remote than a Legacy remote or my iPhone, for example.

I wish MTH well, but this seems like a likely way to lose some market share.

Daniel J. Gonzalez posted:

Rider Sandman posted:

RJR posted:

I find it difficult to accept the argument that components become unavailable.  Seems to me that there is always something that can accomplish the same thing.  Unlike the app, MTH doesn't need to put money into developing the remote.  I have 2 WIUs and 4 remotes at my layout, and rarely use the app. I want to run trains.

 

Politely, but I can assure you that the number of 90’s era components that are either not available or not available in their inititial form factors or cost points is massive. “Something that can accomplish the same thing”, even if available, requires a redesign of a 20-year-old controller in the best case. The idea that one could take a 90’s era circuit board and find a complete set of ASICs, chipsets, surface mount and sticklead devices, and mechanical components (e.g., button/switch  contacts) to mount to it in a cost effective and seamless manner some 20+ years later simply isn’t reality whether one accepts it or not. Keep in mind model railroading command and control was largely custom protocols.  The recent implementation of Bluetooth and WiFi is being phased in so that going forward there will always be “something that can accomplish the same thing” without the need to replace and update custom and expensive hardware and software protocols. 

But to your point, how expensive was a pc back then vs today. How expensive is a usb mouse today vs 20 years ago. Both of those devices received extensive r&d and thanks to it, not only did new technologies form, those "older" technologies got better and cheaper. If MTH is doing this to save money, I think some of us feel it is not exactly correct, if they invest just as much money as the app, they may come up with not only a new design but a better and cheaper one at that, just like those 90's products you speak of. 

Don't tell me "thumbwheels" are getting hard to come by when Dell gives you a free usb mouse with scrollwhell when you buy a $350 PC.

LONG LIFE THE REMOTE! (Sorry lmao I couldn't help my self, I'ma huge Star Wars and Star Trek fan so I just feel like this is Darth vs Luke or Shatner vs Khan!! 😂

In any case, no matter how this goes, I think there should be an alternative for those that don't want to use WiFi.

Goodnight everyone!

If mth was selling a product that had a large market you would be correct. Things like pcs and a wireless mouse are part of a huge market (pcs) that are generic products. There is little to nothing that is standard on a pc, that wireless mouse uses bluetooth ( standard) to connect to a bluetooth receiver (standard) which is on a serial port of some kind (standard),sending standard commands to windows through a driver. Pcs are cheap because the cpu's are produced in the millions by mutliple companies,ie competition,same with mother boards,ram,etc. DCC if the market was bigger would be dirt cheap,if millions of dcc units were sold each year woukd cause the price to plummet. Dcs and legacy have a tiny user base relatively and are proprietary, so there is no competition to cause mass production but more importantly not enough users to justify recreating the remote,redesigning it for available components, getting custom things like the asics made.the thumbwheel as a device is not unique, but the implementation can be, the thumbwheel on the mth remote was likely designed to work a certain way,to fit the space, to feel a certain way, the wheel on the dell mouse wouldn't work on the mth unit or vice versa likely. It is similar to people comparing tv sets to o gauge engines, mass production only reduces costs for markets with large enough markets to drive competition and innovation that reduces costs,pure and simple. Trains aren't even remotely like pcs, where the highest level model year 1 next year becomes the next model down at less cost, then year 3 is even cheaper. Lionel doesnt offer a legacy challenger with x,y,z features for let's say 1200 bucks,then 2 years later offering an upgraded model with several new features while selling the original one for 900 bucks,doesnt happen.

If you look on the Apple website, you can pick up a refurbished iPod Touch for $129.

I have bought a couple refurbished products from Apple before. You basically get a full warranty and the stuff look pristine.  Not a bad way to replace a dedicated controller. 

One thing I have not seen mentioned is the possibility that new code may be required to operate new locomotives in the future and the remote would not support that without a total redesign which would be expensive. With the app, code is not hardwired and is very flexible and can incorporate new engine design electronics. Just an alternative thought rather than MTH abandoning their loyal customers.   

patternpilot posted:

One thing I have not seen mentioned is the possibility that new code may be required to operate new locomotives in the future and the remote would not support that without a total redesign which would be expensive. With the app, code is not hardwired and is very flexible and can incorporate new engine design electronics. Just an alternative thought rather than MTH abandoning their loyal customers.   

That was mentioned in the DCS Dinner by the MTH people that there will be a time when the app will do more than the remote can.

patternpilot posted:

One thing I have not seen mentioned is the possibility that new code may be required to operate new locomotives in the future and the remote would not support that without a total redesign which would be expensive. With the app, code is not hardwired and is very flexible and can incorporate new engine design electronics. Just an alternative thought rather than MTH abandoning their loyal customers.   

That likely is one of the things they are thinking of, that there could be a feature added to an engine or accesory or operating car that requires a new command sequence to activate,one that the remote either isn't capable of addressing (for example, 16 bit address and a command id >65536) or there is no entry method (button,scroll wheel,etc) available that would lend itself to using it. One thing I can think of,if they want to simulate a dispatcher yelling at the engineer (you) for going too fast or telling him (you)  to take the next siding because of a delayed train w higher priority, the app can be coded to do this role and given devices have a speaker you can hear it, with a remote you couldn't do this,would be like having a radio in the cab. Or conversely, in theory the ap could respond to voice commands, and you could play dispatcher, say 'engine 225,be prepared to take siding 6 and wait until cleared to proceed' and the engine would slow down and when it reached the siding (perhaps they would have some sort of rfid that identified a switch uniquely the engine can read) it slows down, clears the switch based on another sensor,then stops until you give the okay to go (obviously this isn't offered today, the two way 'conversation' between the app and the wiu and engine isnt there yet,but could be).

  It's a cost deferment. Buttons and hardware cost too much, easier switch responsibility to other hardware is the bottom line. What you prefer is irrelevant if the bulk follows... and oh yes, they will chase the tech.

   Welcome to "conventional status" on the mfg. radar 

We know the feeling of pleading "It's such a small thing to leave command to upgrade kits" . 

 Just sayin'... Good luck hunting a lifetime of remotes.

As far as parts go, availability has always been an issue on some parts as far back as you'd like to go.  Making something work your own way is a part of model railroading  

Keith L posted:

Daniel J. Gonzalez posted:

Dave45681 posted:

SGP posted:

For the record, if you can have someone help you get the App on your tablet you don't need wireless internet in your home. My understanding is that the MTH WiFi device has the ability to send out its own WiFi signal independently just for your trains. Others with more experience can chime in where that switch is located or if there is an easier way to download the App to your tablet.

MTH set this up so that it doesn't matter what devices you currently use in your life, just grab a second hand tablet around the same cost of the remote if your using WiFi and your good to go.

Correct, of course.  I meant to imply the internet connection was needed in order to get the App on the devices, but your right that they can talk directly to the DCS WiFi unit once the App is installed.

As to the discussion of abandoning the already engineered remote, it has been suggested (or even stated as a hard fact, but I can't quote a source off the top of my head) that it is a parts availability issue.  It's will not be feasible to continue "just ordering more" of the same thing.  Considering the TIU/Remote first came out in 2002 (and was in development for at least 2+ years before that most likely), it's not hard to believe some of the 16+ year old parts are no longer available from the tech companies that actually make the chips.

Therefore, continuing to offer the remote would require at least some level of a re-design.  That is what MTH is trying to avoid.

-Dave

I have read that on this forum before and that might be true BUT!!! to your logic, those said discontinued components have either gotten cheaper to manufacture or a cheaper alternative has been created to replace it.

Electronics get cheaper, smaller, and then replaced with something even cheaper and even smaller and so on and so on.

So MTH doesn't want to re-engineer the remote with modern components does indeed make sense but don't blame the parts, they can be found one way or another. That costs prohibit those changes is a different deal of course.

At this year's LCCA meeting in Chicago in July, I heard Lionel's president, Howard Hitchcock, say that for small businesses like model train companies, dealing with parts obsolescence is a complicated and costly issue. Unlike the Apples of the world who have components made to their specifications, the train companies have to work with whatever components are currently being made. Adaptations are possible to a certain extent, but, at some point, when too many key components no longer exist, you just can't make the product without making the investment to totally re-engineer it. This will likely happen to Legacy somewhere along the line; however, at this time, Lionel has produced a large inventory of Legacy items, including remotes, and will be able to continue to supply the market for a number of years.

Look at the quality of the products being shipped. I wouldn't give "H" the time of day in regards to where the market is going. Nor, the future of a remote. Hopefully, Someone that has "Pazazz" takes the helm!

L.I.TRAIN posted:

gunrunnerjohn posted:

Very disappointing to me.  I prefer the remote.  I think MTH is making a mistake they will likely regret down the road.  Also, if you have more than one TIU, you have to buy WiFi for each of them, imagine how the operators of large layouts are going to react.

John

Totally Agree with you. Poor decision on MTH's part. BTW the TMB club runs DCS with 5 TIU's  in Super Mode, so a change will require 5 WiFi packages. I like as it is now with WiFi as a user option, so MTH should continue to offer both

The Remote is needed, very big mistake Mr. Wolf.

John Pignatelli JR. posted:

L.I.TRAIN posted:

gunrunnerjohn posted:

Very disappointing to me.  I prefer the remote.  I think MTH is making a mistake they will likely regret down the road.  Also, if you have more than one TIU, you have to buy WiFi for each of them, imagine how the operators of large layouts are going to react.

John

Totally Agree with you. Poor decision on MTH's part. BTW the TMB club runs DCS with 5 TIU's  in Super Mode, so a change will require 5 WiFi packages. I like as it is now with WiFi as a user option, so MTH should continue to offer both

The Remote is needed, very big mistake Mr. Wolf.

Sigh... no decision has been made. They basically said that when the time comes that they are no longer able to make the current remote, it will be  discontinued.  That could be next year, the next five years, or in a couple of decades. That also doesn't mean that something else may be in the works when that day arrives to replace said remote.

After having the app, it's a lot faster to add lash  ups or anything,  good bye to the remote. I had a iPad with the big screen just for running trains. Best way I've ever run them. But I went back to postwar completely so.... what do I know lol

Captaincog posted:

Wow.

I was at the DCS dinner and what I heard must have been completely ignored. MTH stated their focus in on the Wifi and tablet/phone apps but would continue to manufacture and support the DCS remote as long as they could. Component obsolescence is the factor where MTH flatly stated if they cannot find something to do the job to make the DCS remotes in the future then MTH would be finished with the DCS remote.

I thought their discussion was fair and honest. There is supposed to be another shipment of remotes and parts coming in according to MTH. How did no one else hear this? 

If they stopped making DCS today there is still enough product out there to keep working for many years and likely beyond.

This sky is falling and focusing on the negative is beyond me.

The remotes are there and MTH is listening to their customers so go run some trains and enjoy the hobby.

Jeff,

I agree with you 100% but realize the nature of this forum has become such that it is more fun, seemingly, for people to complain.  And then there is a contingent that is either a Lionel or MTH fan and will jump on the other firm whenever the opportunity presents itself.  As a long time hobbyist, my view is that Lionel, MTH, Williams and others are offering great products right now.  We have it very good in this hobby, as compared to when I was a kid in the 70s and 80s and a new paint scheme on a crappy running wobbly diesel was exciting.  Now we have something for everyone, from postwar enthusiasts to the scale end of the hobby. 

The reality is that there are DCS remote handhelds available for the foreseeable future.  When the time comes that the availability of the internals is a problem, MTH is giving people plenty of advance warning that in this day and age, when people use phones for everything, they are not going to spend what will likely be hundreds of thousands of dollars redesigning a remote from the early 2000s.  Instead, folks will need to learn to use the app or store up some spare remotes.  In the alternative, it might all become moot as things may move to a universal standard.  That's really all, as you said.  No one is snatching the product for arbitrary reasons.  As was raised during the whole TMCC upgrade availability controversy when Lionel announced the end of ERR, MTH is giving people plenty of warning that hardware won't be available forever.  But as I suspected when Lionel discontinued TMCC upgrade hardware, sometimes you just cannot make people happy (3rd Rail picked it up and then people started complaining because they charged more!!) and so you have to just do what is best for the firm.  If I am Howard Hitchcock or Mike Wolf and I read this forum regularly -- that's what I've concluded - that there is no way to keep certain people happy so you do what is best for the firm, in your judgment, and you move on.

I never thought I would say this, but I think it is time for the moderators to perhaps start deleting threads again.  I enjoy the forum for the hobby advice but the constant stream of complaints ("my new Niagra won't do X!  It's a disgrace!") is really old and reflects poorly on the hobby.

Best regards.