KeyWiz vs. IPAC?

[Edgedamage]

Andy & Randy you both have great products. Same as sony and nintendo. You will always get people saying that one is better than the other. But at the end of the day they BOTH do the same thing. Same goes for your guys keyboard incoders they both do the same thing.(within reason) Just that each has diffrent features. They are both good!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[RandyT]

You don't say why it limits functionality?

Since you asked....if you are interested in only setting it up once and leaving it that way forever, then programming from the CP is fine.  The problem I personally had with controllers that worked like this is that I could never remember what button was defined to what key without writing them all down.  Then I would run across a PC game that didn't like the way the controls were set up, so I would usually re-program on the fly, leaving everything else I wanted to play non-functional.

Profiles that are stored and viewable on the host system are a much more functional solution.  As for testing....utilities like GhostKey work great.  And you don't need to remember key combos to invoke them.  Just double click on the filename and off they go.

A few people out there like the LEDs....but seemingly, just a few.  

I get the opposite point of view, I think many people use the LED support.  Especially if the person picked up volcano buttons or is more into classic games.

I absolutely agree that some will want these.  But if you look through the projects, what percentage of them actually use them?  I think you will find them to be in the vast minority.

Delete all the USB support.

The Mac people need something too.

Exactly, Mac people need it too

Hehe.  In a recent NPR news story they talked about Macs and stated that they represent roughly 3% of the installed personal computer base.  But I was dead serious, they really do need something too!

Oh, so a hidden extra switch on a panel with 30 other switches is the end of the world, eh?  Heh.

How about that annoying buddy that beats on the keyboard while you are playing and screws up your game?  Not with the KeyWiz!

Kick the annoying buddies butt then, don't stand for that  I don't get why people are so afraid of a certain setup because their buddy could screw them up.  Come on folks, the buddy could just reach over and grab your joystick or mash your buttons anyway!  Are you going to put a guard over your controls then too?

The pass through is probably one of the extras I use the most.  I puts a ps/2 port up near the front of my cabient.  If I want to connect a keyboard for maintainence all I have to do is poen the coin door, plug the keyboard in, tada.

Insert "flick switch" between "plug in keyboard" and "tada" and you get the same thing on a KeyWiz, plus two more inputs

BTW, I wasn't saying that it was necessary to disable the external keyboard, just showing a positive aspect of the switch that some may not have considered (especially those with buddies like that....you know you have them )

That's why you make it abundantly clear in your printed documentation where it is and why to avoid doing that.  You do provide printed instructions, don't you?

RTFM
http://www.ultimarc.com/ipac2.html
Now you will argue it isn't printed.  Does it have to be printed?  I would have to buy your product over the internet so I should be able to know how to use the internet.
If you complain about it not being printed then I will complain about you not having a printed catalog.
It's nice if you have a printed manual but definately not something to scorn the opposition about since both are internet based sellers.

My point here is that in this thread there was a person who stated they could not find information on my site that was listed in at least 4 places.  Without a piece of paper in hand, even if it is one you print yourself from the website in question, silly errors are more likely to occur.  I realize this and that is why one is included with the product.

The whole 28 inputs versus 32 inputs isn't that big of a deal either.  The only time that will make a difference is making a 4 player setup where each player only has 2 buttons.  So converting a simpsons cabinet (blasphemy) would be easier with the keywiz.
4 (joystick) + 2 buttons + coin + start = 8 x 4 = 32

The extra inputs just mean you will have enough on a 2 player panel, without resorting to re-using inputs or shifted combos unless you want to.  It is true that not all users will need them, but it does make a 4 player panel more achievable "on the cheap".

RandyT

[SirPoonga]

That's why you make it abundantly clear in your printed documentation where it is and why to avoid doing that.  You do provide printed instructions, don't you?

RTFM
http://www.ultimarc.com/ipac2.html
Now you will argue it isn't printed.  Does it have to be printed?  I would have to buy your product over the internet so I should be able to know how to use the internet.
If you complain about it not being printed then I will complain about you not having a printed catalog.
It's nice if you have a printed manual but definately not something to scorn the opposition about since both are internet based sellers.

My point here is that in this thread there was a person who stated they could not find information on my site that was listed in at least 4 places.  Without a piece of paper in hand, even if it is one you print yourself from the website in question, silly errors are more likely to occur.  I realize this and that is why one is included with the product.

That sounds more like information isn't in an obvious place.

The whole 28 inputs versus 32 inputs isn't that big of a deal either.  The only time that will make a difference is making a 4 player setup where each player only has 2 buttons.  So converting a simpsons cabinet (blasphemy) would be easier with the keywiz.
4 (joystick) + 2 buttons + coin + start = 8 x 4 = 32

The extra inputs just mean you will have enough on a 2 player panel, without resorting to re-using inputs or shifted combos unless you want to.  It is true that not all users will need them, but it does make a 4 player panel more achievable "on the cheap".

RandyT

28 is plenty though for 2 players

[Howard_Casto]

Andy & Randy you both have great products. Same as sony and nintendo.

Yes they do, but don't you mean same as microsoft and nintendo?  Sony is and always has had junk products... afterall the original psx was nintendo's reject system.  Regardless it's a bad analogy because sony and nintendo both target different audiences.  But I digress.... I just hate to see sony and quality product in the same sentence together.  It's kinda like seeing Mr. Rogers and excitment in the same sentence together.    

[RandyT]

My point here is that in this thread there was a person who stated they could not find information on my site that was listed in at least 4 places.  Without a piece of paper in hand, even if it is one you print yourself from the website in question, silly errors are more likely to occur.  I realize this and that is why one is included with the product.

That sounds more like information isn't in an obvious place.

Yeah, the home page and the FAQ page isn't obvious  

28 is plenty though for 2 players

True, in the context of MAME and if you don't mind sharing inputs for things like buttons mounted on the top of joysticks, pinball buttons, possible dedicated 4-ways, etc....  or using shifted functions for things like pause, ESC, TAB, etc....

But if you do want dedicated inputs for any of those things, or plan on playing your old PS collection on the panel with an emulator, the extras can come in handy.

RandyT

[SirPoonga]

hehe, then get an mk64


Ok, new contender, the mini-pac.  I think I will be selling my ipac now.  Also both mouse hacks

[OSCAR]

My point here is that in this thread there was a person who stated they could not find information on my site that was listed in at least 4 places.  Without a piece of paper in hand, even if it is one you print yourself from the website in question, silly errors are more likely to occur.  I realize this and that is why one is included with the product.

That sounds more like information isn't in an obvious place.

Yeah, the home page and the FAQ page isn't obvious  

I can definitely sympathize with this.  

Having gone from not supplying printed instructions  -->  supplying printed instructions  -->  back to not supplying printed instructions, this is my experience:  Doesn't make any difference in the amount of tech support emails.

There will always be customers that would rather send an email to ask rather than read supplied instructions or go to the readily available instructions online (no matter how easy they are to find).  I'm not saying that is a bad thing, just a fact.

[saint]

Someone please email me if this thread gets out of control.  Everyone make nice, it's a new year! Yes, I don't know quite how that relates but ...

[RandyT]

I can definitely sympathize with this.  

Having gone from not supplying printed instructions  -->  supplying printed instructions  -->  back to not supplying printed instructions, this is my experience:  Doesn't make any difference in the amount of tech support emails.

There will always be customers that would rather send an email to ask rather than read supplied instructions or go to the readily available instructions online (no matter how easy they are to find).  I'm not saying that is a bad thing, just a fact.

Heh.  It doesn't happen too often, but I don't mind when a customer asks questions or needs that little bit of extra reassurance.  If it means the difference between a happy customer and one that has problems because they didn't read or understand the instructions, I'll glady take the tech support email.

Different people digest information differently, often depending on how it is presented.  Sometimes the best way can only be learned through direct communication with that person.  From my experience, the biggest customer concern has been whether the installation is really as simple as it seems to them, with a number of folks being surprised (and happy) that everything worked on the first attempt .

The printed doc sheet costs a dime to print, and if it helps someone, even just a little, it's a dime well spent .

RandyT

[OSCAR]

Heh.  It doesn't happen too often, but I don't mind when a customer asks questions or needs that little bit of extra reassurance.  If it means the difference between a happy customer and one that has problems because they didn't read or understand the instructions, I'll glady take the tech support email.

Agreed!  I don't mind the questions at all, and I always encourage those that do write me asking for assistance to keep asking if they have any other questions.  My point is that from my experience, questions will occur with the same consistency, regardless if instructions are online or printed.

[AndyWarne]

Someone please email me if this thread gets out of control.  Everyone make nice, it's a new year! Yes, I don't know quite how that relates but ...

Saint, are you implying that this thread could be locked or even deleted? If so, I think this is a good idea.
I am guilty of starting this all off and I apologize for that. My original post was supposed to be a tongue-in-cheek-humour attempt to design a cost-reduced interface "on-the-fly" and it left me wide open to being misinterpreted.
Some of the issues here, especially the terminal block issue, have been way overcooked. Strangely, the company I get the I-PAC blocks from, a UK company, labels them as "made in UK" whereas I know they are actually made in Italy, but it's just not important, a complete non-issue. There is nothing wrong with the ones on the Keywiz and I never said there was.
Regarding interrupts, again not much here of interest to anyone, but the when the I-PAC gets an interrupt it needs to do a port-read to get the data anyway, so there are no extra clocks needed for the keyboard. It simply does a byte compare with the previous state. The keyboard interface is 2 bits of this, so these bits get compared as part of the byte. Of course if there is a difference, ie the keyboard is active, it then has to go and do something.

I can't even figure why you quoted the post to Chris Ainsworth..

The "test mode" feature of the I-PAC has proved to be invaluable as a support tool. Ghostkey generally is not good at detecting stuck keys which have been stuck right from power-on, ie before the program was started. The test-mode feature will always type the description of the stuck key onto the screen when invoked.

We send out a CD with every order, with PDF docs and all installable software.

RandyT I do apologise if you see yourself as a victim here. It was not meant to be that way. I do feel that some of this is down to your own perception but not all by any means. I assume that you would not object, in this case to the thread being deleted?

I will think more carefully before posting in future, and also will not post after coming back from the pub! (which probably caused the problem in the first place!)

Andy
 

[Tiger-Heli]

It has been suggested that the Keywiz's 4 extra inputs could be useful for some people building a 4 player panel. Maybe. But for a typical 4 player panel you really need 8 inputs per player (4 for the joystick plus 4 buttons) making 32. This doesn't leave any inputs left over for player start, coin, etc.

Better get my replies in before the thread gets locked or deleted!

Just trying to correct misinformation at this point.

There are only 2 or 3 games in MAME that require 4-players and 4-buttons (Tekken, and the D&D series, AFAIK).  There are a ton that require 4-player 3-buttons (28-inputs).  The KeyWiz can support 28-inputs plus Escape and Pause, or even 32 inputs and you can use the Stealth-Shift function (buttons which automatically trigger a shifted input) for Coin and Start.

The I-PAC can't do this.  (Although it's probably not a major concern for most people).

[Tiger-Heli]

OK, from a consumer point of view:

Delete the routines which allow the I-PAC to be programmed or tested by the device "typing" characters into a text editor on the PC.

The limited functionality of such things as opposed to what can be done with dedicated software on the PC side, make these extraneous for the large majority of users.  They wouldn't be missed.

You don't say why it limits functionality?
Anyway, it's a cool idea but Randy is right, it isn't used as much since there is software for the main OSes to program the IPAC.  I've used it once to try it out.

RandyT did NOT say that it limited functionality, he said that the feature provided limited functionality.  I.E., not that the feature kept you from doing stuff, but rather that the feature wasn't very useful.

I won't go on, as RandyT has already responded, but just another example of how words mean things.

[Tiger-Heli]

Again, I am just trying to point out facts at this point .  . .

Saint, are you implying that this thread could be locked or even deleted? If so, I think this is a good idea.

Yes, I'm sure you do (for obvious reasons).  I wouldn't mind seeing the thread get locked (not sure there's much more to say that would benefit anyone at this point, but I hope it is NOT deleted.  There is a lot of good info in here (amongst the jibes), and I would hate for it to be deleted, and someone else ask "Which is better?" and everyone have to re-hash this all again.

Some of the issues here, especially the terminal block issue, have been way overcooked.

True, but you brought that up.

There is nothing wrong with the ones on the Keywiz and I never said there was.

What you said was:

"Replace European made screw-terminals with Far East ones with tiny phillips screws which I don't personally like (OK that's probably just me, there's probably nothing wrong with them really)."

Ok, you did say there was "probably" nothing wrong with them "really", but you also imply that they were tiny screws which would not be a selling feature and is also not true, but I'll shut up now, as I do agree, it's been covered sufficiently.

I can't even figure why you quoted the post to Chris Ainsworth..

Let me help you out here, I think it was in response to your statement that:

" The reason I made that original post was that I received a few emails from customers and friends suggesting that I should "push" the I-PAC a bit more on this forum. This is something I have never really done before and probably never needed to (and wish I had not started!) as I am of the view that this is not the place to advertise."

And the Chris Ainsworth post was a pretty clear example of you using the forum to "push" the I-PAC in 1999.  Not that I think that's a bad thing.  I also wonder how much you really "wish you had not started" that, seeing as the post below this one currently is "New products from Ultimarc for 2004".  Not that that's a bad thing either and I plan to read that thread next.

The "test mode" feature of the I-PAC has proved to be invaluable as a support tool. Ghostkey generally is not good at detecting stuck keys which have been stuck right from power-on, ie before the program was started. The test-mode feature will always type the description of the stuck key onto the screen when invoked.

This is useful information that I was not aware of.  Thank you for clarifying.

I will think more carefully before posting in future, and also will not post after coming back from the pub! (which probably caused the problem in the first place!)

Yep, that might be a good idea.  Those pubs can be dangerous!

Good thing I don't drink any more (or any less!), just kidding!