Keywiz MAX vs. I-Pac2

[USSEnterprise]

Is there any real difference between the two encoders? They both seem to use the same processor, abd have the same number of inputs. Its just a $5 price difference it seems.

[AlanS17]

They store key settings differently and have different shift functionality.

[USSEnterprise]

I want to set my CP up so each player has 6 buttons (2 players), and the first three P1 buttons would be hooked into the trackball buttons

[AlanS17]

You could do that easily with either one. I'm a loyal Ultimarc fan so I always choose I-Pacs, but lots of people here have good stuff to say about the KeyWiz's.

[USSEnterprise]

plus I'd guess that shipping is a lot cheaper on Keywiz, since Ultimarc s in the UK

[dweebs0r]

I bought a Keywiz PS2 encoder and received the thing in 2 days.

Super fast shipping, and great products.  Plus Randy is a good guy and always trolls the forums here answering questions.

That being said, I previously owned an Ipac2 bought from a member of this forum.
It worked great as well.  I didn't have to wait on the shipping from the UK since it was used.

[NoOne=NBA=]

I didn't have to wait on the shipping from the UK since it was used.

I've never had to wait for anything from Ultimarc.
DHL delivers to the west coast in about 3 days.

They are both very comparable products.
The only place that I've seen where the KeyWiz really has an advantage is for a barebones 4 player CP.
You can squeak one out with the KeyWiz, but would need an I-pac4 to do it with Ultimarc's products.

For a 2-P CP, the differences are mostly in HOW you do stuff, not in WHAT you can do with them.

[dweebs0r]

Well,

I never bought anything new from Ultimarc so I guess I shouldn't have
commented on the shipping.  I just presumed that it would take a while
since it from overseas and all.

I was just impressed with the Keywiz since I just bought one and it got here so fast.

-Dweebs

[dweebs0r]

Plus,

isnt this a little like Ford vs Chevy?

[Jollyrob]

no, cause Ford sucks


On a side note, I plan to have 2 joysticks and 6 buttons per player (1 t-stick plus and 1 topfire 8 way type deal)

I'm thinking keywiz, would it have enough inputs ya think

[dweebs0r]

Wow, what about Shelby Mustangs GT500s, GT40s, 427 Cobras, Panteras??

Ford most assuredly does not suck.


Edit:  Sorry!  Didnt mean to hijack the topic...

[Jollyrob]

What do I know, my first car was a Lincoln


(of course, my second was an 86 Monte Carlo, and my current is a 94 Cavalier Convertible)

It's the heartbeat of America, it's todays Chevrolet

[USSEnterprise]

I wouldn't trust any American cars, except maybe Saturn.

[Lilwolf]

As for cars go.... I've had a few crap Fords and some GREAT toyotas..  Ford needs to learn how to build a reliable car... and one with gas milleage..

As for encoders.  Having one of each (ipac4 and keywiz eco).  There is something to be said for the keywiz's small size. 

But they are both great quality.  And the shipping shouldn't be why you choose one or the other.... Thats just part of the costs.

Expect to be happy with either one. 

[NiN^_^NiN]

I love my keywiz and i love seeing that little wizard dude ont he chip hehe.

They both run great and are really good products it just up to you which one would fit better in the cab if you have space issues.

Also i have a 94 Ford Probe GT but its an australian version so it had alot of problems fixed that the american one didn't.

But does it count? it is the mazda engine hehe

[DreamWeb]

I'm happy with my Keywiz Max.  But, if I had it to do over again, I'd get the Ipaq.

Why?  So that I could take advantage of the built in quick flashing features that are supported so well in Mamewah.

Keywiz... just can't do it.  It takes about 12 seconds (or so) to flash the encoder each time you boot windows up.

d.

[Tiger-Heli]

http://www.mameworld.net/tigerheli/encoder/main.htm#THE_PLAYERS  - comparison table.

http://www.mameworld.net/tigerheli/encoder/index.htm - Mostly software rundown, which in actual use is the biggest difference.

http://www.mameworld.net/tigerheli/encoder/main.htm#KeyWiz_vs._I-PAC2 - Very brief rundown, but you are better reading the entire page before making your decision.

I own a KeyWiz and am very happy with it, but I have no reason to think I would not be happy with an I-PAC/2 as well.

More below.

[Tiger-Heli]

I'm happy with my Keywiz Max.  But, if I had it to do over again, I'd get the Ipaq.

Why?  So that I could take advantage of the built in quick flashing features that are supported so well in Mamewah.

Keywiz... just can't do it.  It takes about 12 seconds (or so) to flash the encoder each time you boot windows up.

d.

I'm not sure I go along with all of this.

I assume you are using Windows XP.  I think it only takes me three or four seconds to flash the SDRAM when I want to re-program the encoder, which is only for PC games, but I use Win98SE.

If you use MAME and the default codeset on the KeyWiz (which I do), there is no reason to flash the encoder each time you boot windows up.  For that matter, for Project 64, ZSNES, FCE Ultra, and Z26, and VirtuaNES, there is no need to flash the encoder if you use the custom versions that let you exit with the ESC key.  I don't know about Daphne or Chankast, but I would assume the same is true.  I only flash the encoder for PC games like Train Simulator and the like, and those only b/c I either can't assign ctrl and alt keys to inputs, or am used to the keyboard defaults.

I am a little skeptical of the "built-in quick flashing features" - A glance at Ultimarc's website only showed this:
 
"Download to RAM instead of EEPROM (command line function):
This feature will be enabled in the next release. The feature is already implemented in the I-PAC chip.
This enables the codeset to be stored in temporary storage on the I-PAC board instead of permanent storage."

Andy Warne has privately claimed to me something like a one-second load time using the WinIPAC IPD.  I have no reason to doubt this, but also have not heard it independently confirmed, and let's just say I'm skeptical of manufacturer's product claims after some unrelated (to Ultimarc or KeyWiz) recent events.

As far as MAMEwah, support, as best I can tell, all MAMEwah is doing is loading an I-PAC.ipc file prior to launching the emulator.  It could just as easily launch a .kwz file and reprogram the KeyWiz prior to launch.

[finsailor]

I bought a KeyWhiz Eco, which sort of works with XP and 1 GHz.
I have problems reprogramming it. It rarely works. Most of the time it cannot make the connection or the reprogramming fails.
But when the programming has succeeded, it works fine. No problems after that.
Randy from KeyWhiz was kind enough to offer help via email, suggesting that its a PC performance / virus  issue or the wiring.

Could of course be a user issue :-)

[RandyT]

I bought a KeyWhiz Eco, which sort of works with XP and 1 GHz.
I have problems reprogramming it. It rarely works. Most of the time it cannot make the connection or the reprogramming fails.
But when the programming has succeeded, it works fine. No problems after that.
Randy from KeyWhiz was kind enough to offer help via email, suggesting that its a PC performance / virus  issue or the wiring.

Sorry you weren't able to resolve your issues, but I just want to make sure that it's understood that this situation is far from the "norm".  There are literally thousands of KeyWiz units working fine in the field, many I assume under XP. 

Usually a problem like this is due to another very persistent process "stealing" focus from the uploader application, causing a momentary loss in communication.  Even though there are provisions built into the software to help prevent this, things like spyware, worms, virii and the like operate at a much lower level and are more difficult to control.  The fact that the computer is a little underpowered for XP may also have something to do with it, but I haven't seen that be a specific issue yet.

I wish I was able to sit in front of a system and troubleshoot it when something like this pops up, but unfortunately some things have to be left to the end user.  It's unfortunate when there's a situation I can't correct through the support process, but it does happen on occasion. It's one of the reasons each board is powered and checked 100% before shipping so that we can be reasonably sure that any difficulties that might arise won't be due to a manufacturing defect.

Could of course be a user issue :-)

Heh.  I'd be more quick to blame spyware peddlers and other similar dirtbag types.   

RandyT

[Tiger-Heli]

The fact that the computer is a little underpowered for XP may also have something to do with it, but I haven't seen that be a specific issue yet.

Without knowing the RAM amounts, I wouldn't say that a 1Ghz Processor is "a little underpowered for XP"

Microsoft's (admittedly optimistic) requirements say it can run on a 300Mhz or even a 233 Mhz machine.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/upgrading/sysreqs.mspx
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/SupportCD/XPMyths.html

Of couse those pages also say it will work with 64-128M of RAM and my experience has been that is is sluggish with 256M and only really happy with 512M (or more), so you may be closer to the truth on this than I am.

[RandyT]

Of couse those pages also say it will work with 64-128M of RAM and my experience has been that is is sluggish with 256M and only really happy with 512M (or more), so you may be closer to the truth on this than I am.

Heh, I probably should have phrased that differently.  XP has a lot more going on in the background than earlier OS's.  So, the more tasks happening at the same time will equate to more divisions of the processor's resources.  The slower the processor, the longer the time spent in each of the divisions and the longer the pause between servicing them . Communication with the keyboard via the uploader software is accomplished though Windows system calls to make it as "safe" to the stability of the OS as possible.  Therefore if the OS doesn't deem the communication to be time-critical (which most communication to the keyboard isn't) it will get held off until other higher priority tasks are completed. 

The Keywiz uploader is somewhat timing critical, so I offered computer speed under that OS as a possibility.  What might cause a paint program just to have bad lag, could have a very different effect on a hardware / software combination where the timing of the responses from the hardware is important.

As I said though, this isn't from direct experience and troubleshooting from 1000 miles away leads one to explore esoteric possibilities that sometimes actually help to fix the problem

RandyT

[USSEnterprise]

I actually had XP Pro running on a 300MHz PC with 192MB RAM for a while. It actually worked pretty smoothly. I'm going to be dual booting with Windows 2000, and Fedora Core 3, both of which take advantage of my dual processors. Are either encoder compatible with Linux (Fedora Core 3)?

[Tiger-Heli]

Somewhat, the I-PAC moreso than the KeyWiz.

AFAIK, the KeyWiz will work fine under Linux if you use the default codeset (which I do under Win98).

The I-PAC had a programming utility for Linux, but AFAIK, it doesn't work with the current version of the board.  However, you can program the I-PAC without software using the keyboard pass-through, and it will remember those settings, so you could program it and use it with a custom codeset in Linux.

Also, you the KeyWiz only loses it's settings on power removal, so you COULD boot into Win2k, program it, boot into Fedora and use it, but I don't think you would want to.

[DreamArcades]

Personally, I think the IPAC

[Timoe]

My keywiz's both use USB and work FLAWLESSLY.

[DreamArcades]

My keywiz's both use USB and work FLAWLESSLY.

OK, apparently my last comment was dated.
Still, the keyboard passthough on the IPAC is great.

[Timoe]

indeed.  I'm currently stalled on a control panel where I am using two (2) GP49wiz interfaces and one (1) IPAC-2.

Its a bit overkill but I've got the best of both worlds.

[Tiger-Heli]

My keywiz's both use USB and work FLAWLESSLY.

OK, apparently my last comment was dated.
Still, the keyboard passthough on the IPAC is great.

Nope, your last comment was NOT dated.  KeyWiz is still PS/2 only.  Works fine.  GP-Wiz and GP-Wiz49 are both USB only.  Works fine.

Timoe is either accidentally identifying the encoder inaccurately or intentionally being a smart---I'm attempting to get by the auto-censor and should be beaten after I re-read the rules--, not sure which.

The keyboard pass-thru on the I-PAC works but is over-rated IMHO.  Easy enough to either use a USB or wireless keyboard with the KeyWiz, or position the computer in the cab where you can swap the interface when you need keyboard support.

[Timoe]

oops mah bahd 

[USSEnterprise]

I thought KeyWiz MAX has a keyboard passthrough?

[DreamWeb]

Tiger-Heli,

Apparently the wait time for the flash is -significantly- lessened if you're running Win98.  Under WinXP, I find that it does take between 10-12 seconds.

d.

[RandyT]

Apparently the wait time for the flash is -significantly- lessened if you're running Win98.  Under WinXP, I find that it does take between 10-12 seconds..

This is true.  As stated above, the Uploader software uses Windows system calls to do it's magic.  Starting with Win2K, the pertinent system calls changed and are slower than the ones used in 98SE.

This is also mentioned in the documentation for the software.

RandyT

[Tiger-Heli]

I thought KeyWiz MAX has a keyboard passthrough?

The pass-thru is not active or automatic.  Meaning that you have to flip a switch to select between the keyboard and the encoder sending keys to the PC.

IMHO, if I have to plan how to mount the encoder so that the switch is always accessible, I could just as easily plan things so the motherboard rear ports are accessible and swap it there.

I ended up covering over the passthru port on my KeyWiz (which also prevents anyone from accidentally plugging the computer cable up to it) and haven't missed it at all.  (And I suspect it's not missed on the Eco's either.)

[Tiger-Heli]

Tiger-Heli,

Apparently the wait time for the flash is -significantly- lessened if you're running Win98.  Under WinXP, I find that it does take between 10-12 seconds.

d.

I really wasn't doubting you on the 10-12 seconds, although I can't verify it myself.  I estimate my wait time under 98SE at 3-5 seconds.  KevSteele posted in his review that the wait time under XP was less than 20 seconds, but I don't think he ran a stopwatch.  RandyT has unofficially said that the wait time under XP might be twice as long as under 98SE, which if you take the high side of my numbers and the low side of yours would be about right.

I have more questions on the less than 1 second claimed time for the WinIPAC IPD, although I have no way (or reason) to dispute that either.