Question for Lionel, Base 3

@peter allen 072518 posted:

Simply put by having a micro USB port, your product looks old to me, it looks out-dated already. This is the new hotness, its got a cool design, it sounds great to me, its a product for me. I have never had a remote control, I have been smart phone from day one. Having that old micro USB port makes it look so bad to me. I want to like this.

Peter,

I hear ya, but ...

Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately actually?), you're not the average Lionel customer.

Toy trains are not state-of-the-art things.  They were at one time, way back in the day (c. 1900, and maybe as late as 1955), but not now.  It's easy to see this.  A good example can be found in the struggles with TMCC that we see posted by average folks on this forum.  Now 30 years old yet still considered by many people to be 'newfangled' and very difficult to master.

It might be sad but the inclusion of a micro USB instead of a USB-C makes no difference to most customers.  It carries no special significance.

BTW -- You may regret getting that door key with your new car, even if it's simply the one hidden inside your key fob for emergencies, but on that unfortunate day when the car's battery goes dead, after 5 or 6 years, you'll be thankful that you have it so that you can get inside.

Mike

@Mellow Hudson Mike posted:

Peter,

I hear ya, but ...

Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately actually?), you're not the average Lionel customer.

  A good example can be found in the struggles with TMCC that we see posted by average folks on this forum.  Now 30 years old yet still considered by many people to be 'newfangled' and very difficult to master.

Mike

Well, if folks can log on to this forum and complain about how difficult TMCC is. They should have no problem figuring it out since TMCC ,and Legacy for that matter, are much more "low tech" than accessing this forum.

IMO. Many of the struggles come from operator error, or impatience, i.e. not reading instructions or paying attention to the equipment you have. The rest is from "fear of the unknown".

Recently there was a post by a member who insisted his command base didn't use a wall plug, only to look under his layout and see it was plugged in

A poll taken on the forum back in 2014 indicated that 29% of members who responded used conventional only. The rest were TMCC/Legacy and DCS operators.  Only a small cross section of course, but a cross section nonetheless.

While I have no interest in running trains with anything other than my Legacy handheld. It does seem wise for Lionel to at least attempt to keep toy trains relevant in our digital world.

Back to the O.P.s question.  Dave is usually fairly receptive to emails, if he doesn't respond here. dolsen@Lionel.com

While I have to agree that the USB-C would have been a better choice, I don't see the big deal with a micro-USB connection.  It's a $3 cable...

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

While I have to agree that the USB-C would have been a better choice, I don't see the big deal with a micro-USB connection.  It's a $3 cable...

The big deal is simple. micro usb is a old, it’s cheap, it looks old and cheap. Good quality products do not come with micro usb. New android phones don’t come with micro usb. To me it’s a brand new product that looks cheap and as a new technology produce it makes me ugh… It’s a red flag to me, it’s a choice to not go with what is modern and leading edge and instead go with dated and cheap. It’s not about the cable, it’s about what the cable means. You would not want a new tv with Composite cables (red, yellow, white).

They make a Dongle for that...

@peter allen 072518 posted:

The big deal is simple. micro usb is a old, it’s cheap, it looks old and cheap. Good quality products do not come with micro usb. New android phones don’t come with micro usb. To me it’s a brand new product that looks cheap and as a new technology produce it makes me ugh… It’s a red flag to me, it’s a choice to not go with what is modern and leading edge and instead go with dated and cheap. It’s not about the cable, it’s about what the cable means. You would not want a new tv with Composite cables (red, yellow, white).

Peter,

Let's try coming at it from a different direction.

What would you like the USB-C to do?  Or to be used for?

What feature(s) must it provide in absolutely, positively needing to be there?

Mike

One thing good about USB-C is that it’s designed for more plug/unplug cycles, and is generally much sturdier.

While the primary advantages of USB-C over that of micro-b are really not needed for the BASE 3, there is the concern of of how rapidly Micro-b is disappearing from the industry. It's a dying connector style and if you want to built a device to stand the test of time or at least the next decade, USB-C is the way to go.

I did a quick search and adapters are available for $7.00.

Maybe Lionel will include them with the Base 3 or list them in their catalog?

@Jeff2035 posted:

I did a quick search and adapters are available for $7.00.

Maybe Lionel will include them with the Base 3 or list them in their catalog?

This is not about the adapters. Adapters only chance the shape of the port, they do not affect they protocols that port uses. Example usb-c and thunderbolt. Usb-c is the shape of the port, thunderbolt is the protocol it runs. (That is however a huge digression.)

Yes you can get adapters, but that’s not the point. This is a new product, with a lot of good design choices, and one very odd technical choice. I want to know why.

Keep in mind that proper USB-C requires an additional chip with firmware/config to negotiate power delivery, etc with the device/power brick/etc other side. If these features aren't needed for the Base3 (and IMO they're not), then it's just extra cost for no gain. Folks on the forum complain about cost enough already, I can see why Lionel didn't go down that road if it wasn't absolutely necessary.

@Mike0289 posted:

Keep in mind that proper USB-C requires an additional chip with firmware/config to negotiate power delivery, etc with the device/power brick/etc other side. If these features aren't needed for the Base3 (and IMO they're not), then it's just extra cost for no gain. Folks on the forum complain about cost enough already, I can see why Lionel didn't go down that road if it wasn't absolutely necessary.

Omit the chip and forgo the ability for the BASE3 to charge devices.

@Dennis-LaRock posted:

They make a Dongle for that...

You shouldn't need a dongle for a new $500 item.

I think emailing Dave is a good choice…….they (Lionel) want their product to be relevant and certainly to stand the test of time…….. see what he says…..

Peter

I can't imagine what you would be using the USB for any ways.

Also a Tech Person here. I think part of the reason why may be a couple reasons. One it was probably in development prior to the EU ruling requiring USB-C on devices. Two, I have purchased a lot of newer devices that use Micro-B for charging, I am not a big fan of it, but I deal with it as needed. Some brand new devices I have purchased use Micro-B for charging some devices I have.

This may be one of times that the timing is off based on development and production. USB-C takes a bit more on the PCB and to get it running and to meet USB certifications.

One thing I agree with some of the other posters here is I don't think it will need the features available to USB type C. Sometimes Micro-B is enough to charge a device for cheaper.

Also, you mentioned Android phones don't use Micro-B anymore, I would counter with iPhones still use lighting ports at least for another year or two. Not to mention some of the smaller iPads also use the lightning connector. The only apple device I know of that is portable that uses USB-C is the iPad Pro.

@Magicland posted:

You shouldn't need a dongle for a new $500 item.

That was tongue in cheek there buddy... and, does it 'really' matter?   The line of thinking is probably right up there with... why haven't any manufacturers stuck a $0.25 TVS in their 1,000+ dollar  locomotives?

@Dennis-LaRock posted:

That was tongue in cheek there buddy... and, does it 'really' matter?   The line of thinking is probably right up there with... why haven't any manufacturers stuck a $0.25 TVS in their 1,000+ dollar  locomotives?

Dennis, you’re trying to reason with the unreasonable, ……all you can do is offer some cheese, ….to go with their whine ….they’ll find something to bellyache about, …no matter how hard they try!…they have to, it’s their creed,…..🙄

Pat

OH!!!  Pat, put those drivers (with traction tires) on the 5344... pulling 24 cars up a 2.8 grade now!

@Mike0289 posted:

Keep in mind that proper USB-C requires an additional chip with firmware/config to negotiate power delivery, etc with the device/power brick/etc other side. If these features aren't needed for the Base3 (and IMO they're not), then it's just extra cost for no gain. Folks on the forum complain about cost enough already, I can see why Lionel didn't go down that road if it wasn't absolutely necessary.

Thank you!
Your reasoning here is impeccable. I did not think about the additional cost of the chips and boards.
This is the kind of response  I was looking for.
And I’m sure before anyone can say it supply line issues…..

USB-C was Android's answer to the Apple lightning cable which can be inserted right side up or upside down.

John

@peter allen 072518 posted:

Thank you!
Your reasoning here is impeccable. I did not think about the additional cost of the chips and boards.
This is the kind of response  I was looking for.
And I’m sure before anyone can say it supply line issues…..

The "additional cost" for USB C with an E-Marker chip is about $0.07 per unit.  On a device with a list price of $499.99. Suffice it to say, cost is a non-issue.

@Craftech posted:

USB-C was Android's answer to the Apple lightning cable which can be inserted right side up or upside down.

John

Android itself has nothing to do with USB-C.

USB standards are maintained by a consortium of tech companies like HP, IBM, Apple, Microsoft, Intel, NEC, and others. Android adopted USB-C because it is a much more robust connector that supports charge rate negotiation.

All,

USB-C is used for USB-3.0

The Base3 only supports USB-2.0 as there is no need for 3.0. It is simply a comms connection. It'll primarily be used for connecting to a PC that does not have a Wi-Fi card. There is no ability for the Base3 to charge a mobile device. We already upped the internal power supply in the Base3 to 5A to account for LCS bus power. Increasing the size of the power supply for smart device charging would have been a no-go for a variety of reasons.

BTW, the Base3 will have the USB cable included.

@MartyE posted:

I can't imagine what you would be using the USB for any ways.

As for the brouhaha over USB-C vs micro-USB, I'm just not seeing it as a huge deal.  As I said, it would have been nice if they had used the USB-C port, but they didn't.  I suggest that you all get over it.

I see Dave snuck in with the answer, that makes perfect sense.

Any PC I'm connecting to Base3 will be over network.  I like that Lionel added the option but I just don't see the big deal as to why it's not 3.0.  Glad Dave chimed in.

@peter allen 072518 posted:

The big deal is simple. micro usb is a old, it’s cheap, it looks old and cheap. Good quality products do not come with micro usb. New android phones don’t come with micro usb. To me it’s a brand new product that looks cheap and as a new technology produce it makes me ugh… It’s a red flag to me, it’s a choice to not go with what is modern and leading edge and instead go with dated and cheap. It’s not about the cable, it’s about what the cable means. You would not want a new tv with Composite cables (red, yellow, white).

I'd love it if new tvs came with the RCA jacks and the old coaxial connectors too.  Not everything i want to use has hdmi or usb.  New technology is great... when it doesn't forcibly obsolete the old.

@MartyE posted:

Any PC I'm connecting to Base3 will be over network.  I like that Lionel added the option but I just don't see the big deal as to why it's not 3.0.  Glad Dave chimed in.

My Legacy system it connected through my home network as is my DCS WiFi unit.  I can run trains from the attic if I like.  I also like the fact that I can do configuration of my command base sitting at a real keyboard and not doing it on the remote.

Many thanks (from all of us) to @Dave Olson for his insightful response. We all need to remember that he and his team are walking a fine line between implementing the myriad of features we're constantly clamoring for and keeping prices from increasing any more than necessary. I for one think they're doing a great job! Keep the trains rolling!

Are they using the usb port for data transmission (ie to be able to plug it into a computer and download new firmware, though wifi could do that), are they using it to charge an external device, is this for the serial connection if you want to connect the base to a DCS TIU?

Not so sure about USB C being more reliable, the one on my phone barely works, after about a year getting a cable to work with it was really hard. On the other hand USB C has more power than micro USB does, so you can charge something more rapidly off of it, and it also has a higher data rate.

Does that matter with the Cab-3 base? Given I don't know what is for can't say. USB C has been around a pretty long while, so it isn't that it wasn't available for Lionel to use when designing the Cab 3 base, I suspect that they used micro usb because it is what they had used before and may not even have thought about USB C.

*additional note*.. just saw that Dave O responded. So basically it was comms with an external device if the user doesn't use a home wifi network, prob to upgrade the firmware on the it.  Honestly can't blame them for not using USB C, first of all most people these days likely are using wifi in their house with internet access (yes, I realize some people don't have internet, though I suspect if you did a venn diagram of people using legacy/tmcc and home wifi, would be a pretty huge overlap) so few will want to do that, and basically all laptops and computers have come with wifi for a really long time.

Given what it is used for, if a user has a device that is usb c only, they can easily get a micro usb to usb c cable (laptops and desktops as far as I know generally come with USB 3.0 in the "A" configuration, so again would be an easy to get cable).

Micro USB will work fine if someone needs it. Among other things, the cost isn't the chip set, it is the engineering time which is expensive.

@bigkid posted:

is this for the serial connection if you want to connect the base to a DCS TIU?

No, specifically to get the normal base serial port we are familiar with, you have to use the LCS SER2 module that connects through the PDI ports.

So basically, that's just more of an emergency you need to flash a new firmware that for whatever reason cannot be performed over the wifi network. As an example, this is obviously built from several modules, each having their own microprocessor. There are bootloaders to allow for firmware of a device to be updated but since that communication must be through that device (example the wifi module) then a multi step fimware that affected the main hub processor of the unit but also included a wifi module update, which is done first, are there steps and stages or multiple update files? All headaches for Lionel to work out, but again, having a physical port on a device is often seen as a recovery or alternate method to flash firmware when over the air cannot be done or is too complicated.

@Vernon Barry posted:

No, specifically to get the normal base serial port we are familiar with, you have to use the LCS SER2 module that connects through the PDI ports.

I think Dave Olsen actually mentioned in a previous YouTube video that the USB interface replaces the DB9 used on previous devices. Supposedly, you can connect a USB to Serial adapter and connect to the DB9 port on a TIU and send TMCC (not Legacy) commands to the BASE3.

Here is a different perspective from an old guy who made structural drawings his whole life and only knows very basic electricity and how to change a light bulb.

While entertaining reading eating lunch, none of this makes sense to me and that is OK.

I have one ordered. When it arrives, I will hook it up per the instructions. If it works, great. If not, I will call my train pusher and ask some questions.

Donald

@H1000 posted:

I think Dave Olsen actually mentioned in a previous YouTube video that the USB interface replaces the DB9 used on previous devices. Supposedly, you can connect a USB to Serial adapter and connect to the DB9 port on a TIU and send TMCC (not Legacy) commands to the BASE3.

From the catalog

So here is the problem, the difference between. USB HOST port and a USB DEVICE (sometimes called a client) port. This clearly is a USB DEVICE port meaning the CAB3 is the end device and the chip on the other side of this is either native microprocessor that supports USB, or this is something like a FTDI USB to serial data port inside the CAB3. While this might give you a "virtual" bi-directional serial port to an external device such as a computer- that computer has to have the software driver and understand how to use this port. Again, as I understand it, this port is the end device- not the host capable port.

In order for you to plug in a USB to serial converter dongle- that then would have to be a USB host port and the microprocessor inside the CAB3 would ALSO have to have the firmware software driver and be compatible with your given USB to serial converter or dongle.

Starting at 32:42, Dave repeats what I said, the TIU will connect using the PDI port and an LCS SER 2 module, and not said, the 50-1032 MTH serial cable.

https://youtu.be/W5OqI4l8s9U?t=1962

And if it's USB OTG it can be used as either HOST or DEVICE.  The USB port on my phone can act as host to devices that I plug in or it can act as device when I plug it into my computer.

Stepping back, this entire discussion is too little too late.

In the same demo with Dave, he makes it sound like "cutting the tooling" which I assume means the injection molding of the housing is the long pole in the tent. So between sourcing the components, designing the board, building out the firmware, a discussion about changing a USB port style in the middle of July, too late. Maybe version 2.

For those of you who pre-ordered, I hope it works for you and you get it sometime soon. Given the red hot used market for any control system these days, I feel sorry for those just entering the hobby.

Discussing about what this will or won't be, another topic going nowhere fast.

The subject of the USB port came up soon after the original announcement in regards to whether a Command Base could be interfaced to the Base3 the same way it can be done on a Legacy Base via serial port. The reply by Dave said no, rather you would have to use an LCS port with a proper interface cable. That should provide a clue to capability of the Base3 USB port.

Pete