| Main > Main Forum |
| 1st timer, newbee question. |
| << < (3/7) > >> |
| NiteWalker:
--- Quote from: Fozzy The Bear on March 21, 2007, 04:01:22 am ---IMHO. The Keywiz especially in the no solder version is actually a better product. Here's the link: http://www.groovygamegear.com Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The Bear) --- End quote --- Why so? I was always under the impression that the Ipac2 was the better encoder. |
| Kaytrim:
--- Quote from: NiteWalker on March 21, 2007, 08:53:54 am --- --- Quote from: Fozzy The Bear on March 21, 2007, 04:01:22 am ---IMHO. The Keywiz especially in the no solder version is actually a better product. Here's the link: http://www.groovygamegear.com Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The Bear) --- End quote --- Why so? I was always under the impression that the Ipac2 was the better encoder. --- End quote --- Not to get into an interface war here. I am just stating what I have for an opinion. Between the two interfaces, KeyWiz Max and Ipac2, I would choose the KeyWiz if you have a PS/2 port on the computer. Otherwise I'd have to go with the Ipac2 if what I wanted was a keyboard encoder. If you want to add a game pad option then I would go with the GPWiz. The KeyWiz is a PS/2 option only. Randy's USB option is the GPWiz. Randy went this way for technical reasons that I cannot even begin to describe or understand. All I know is that I have not had any problems with his GPWiz boards. I am also getting ready to use the KeyWiz, GPWiz49 and OptiWiz in the next version of my control panel. I plan on using my GPWiz for a portable single player CP. TTFN :cheers: Kaytrim |
| Tiger-Heli:
--- Quote from: NiteWalker on March 21, 2007, 08:53:54 am --- --- Quote from: Fozzy The Bear on March 21, 2007, 04:01:22 am ---IMHO. The Keywiz especially in the no solder version is actually a better product. Here's the link: http://www.groovygamegear.com Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The Bear) --- End quote --- Why so? I was always under the impression that the Ipac2 was the better encoder. --- End quote --- I'll let Fozzy answer since he made the original assertion, but . . . They all have different pros and cons - IMHO. 32 inputs vs. 28 inputs - advantage KeyWiz (but the I-PAC VE has 32 also) EEPROM vs. SDRAM - advantage I-PAC. Number of shifted inputs - advantage I-PAC (but 24 on the KW is probably plenty). USB or PS/2 capability - advantage I-PAC. Cost - Advantage KeyWiz Software Speed - Probably advantage I-PAC, but I need to test the KW 2.0 software. Shift Key Implementation - Personal Preference - I like the KW better, others like the I-PAC better. Overall processing throughput - Likely KW advantage, but not sure it matters. FWIW . . . |
| vrf:
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but doesn't the Keywiz need a dedicated shift button (no function other than shift), whereas the Ipac's shift button can have it's own function? Seems like this would be a important distinction for those wanting to reduce clutter on their panel. |
| shardian:
--- Quote from: vrf on March 21, 2007, 11:32:53 am ---Correct me if I'm wrong here, but doesn't the Keywiz need a dedicated shift button (no function other than shift), whereas the Ipac's shift button can have it's own function? Seems like this would be a important distinction for those wanting to reduce clutter on their panel. --- End quote --- IPAC has the shift function hard wired to the 1p input on the board. The keywiz has a dedicated shift (Shazaam)input. You can reprogram the ipac and create a dedicated shift function, bt if you do that you are better of with the keywiz. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |