Ultimarc Spinner details...

[RoomTenONine]

I emailed Andy this week about connecting spinners from other companies to the Mini-pac.  He explained that it was possible, but also told me to check out the new Spintrak info that would be up on the ultimarc site in a day or so.  I'm glad i waited...this looks REAL nice.  It uses Tornado style tops, which I know a lot of people are looking for since Slik-Stik took a nose dive.

http://www.ultimarc.com/SpinTrak.htm

[Droler]

I was thinking these look perfect for cocktail and bartops. Very small footprint.

[RoomTenONine]

Agreed.  I like the "tweakability" too.  I'm getting one for the new CP, with the knob that is closest to a Tempest style (wish they did a replica of that and/or the Tron like Oscar did).

[TPB]

A great new product.   

Good competition for the TT2.

The web page could do with some fine tuning, though.

The images displaying the small & large flyweights, are upside-down.  A 180 degree rotation is in order.

I guess the focal point of those images is the flyweights, perhaps that's why they're upside-down, to have the flyweights at the top of the images.  Still, it looks unusual, as its the opposite orientation to how the spinners are mounted in the panel.

_{[ image names "spintrak2" and "spintrak3" ]}

[RandyT]

Good competition for the TT2.

It's unfortunate, however, that the "adoption" of yet another one of my concepts is necessary for him to "compete".  Apologies for the snark, but this is just about as sleazy as it gets.

RandyT

[TPB]

The new SpinTrak, apparently, is the World's Only USB 2.0 spinner, which helps avoid backspin :

this is the worlds only USB 2.0 spinner.  USB 2.0 enables a 16-bit interface and a faster packet-rate than USB 1.1 Vital to avoid slowdown or backspin.

Good stuff.   

I presume this means the TT2 is based on older USB 1.0 or 1.1 technology.


Still, I wouldn't have full confidence in that claim, until Randy concedes that it's indeed the case.

That's because the SpinTrak is no stranger to dubious marketing claims.

For 18 months after the release of the TT2 (which has 1,200 transitions per revolution - the same as the "new" SpinTrak), the old SpinTrak (at a lower 1,000 transitions per revolution) persisted with this boast on the webpage :

The highest-resolution rotary control ever produced for arcade gaming use.

...

Resolution of 1000 transitions per revolution makes this the only control ever to match the Arkanoid Trackwheel ...

That boast can still be seen here (until Google refreshes its cache) :

http://209.85.173.104/search?hl=en&q=cache%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ultimarc.com%2FSpinTrak.htm&meta=


Anyway, marketing-speak aside, it's great to have a serious new competitor to the TT2.

Perhaps we'll soon see a new TT3, that utilises the same USB 2.0 technology, to close the technological gap that the new SpinTrak has created.

[RandyT]

Perhaps we'll soon see a new TT3, that utilises the same USB 2.0 technology, to close the technological gap that the new SpinTrak has created.

Your mouse is a standard 1.1 HID device.  Had any trouble with that? 

The TT2 has never had a performance problem, so there is no "gap".  It never misses a beat, even on a lowly 98SE system. 

Take the marketing claims lightly when it comes to these types of devices.

And BTW, a 2.0 mouse interface is not a new spinner design.

RandyT

[TPB]

Based on this insight from Andy, I had thought the new SpinTrak might turn out to be an Enhanced and Re-badged TT2.

Andy talks of a new agreement with a "manufacturer with an off-the-shelf product".  Possibly the manufacturer could have been GGG ? :

The SpinTrak is discontinued in its present form. We found it was too expensive to produce.

We found a manufacturer with an off-the-shelf product which was almost perfect so it will be replaced by this, with our own interface which will be 16-bit  USB 2.0, which is necessary for the high resolution to avoid backspin or slowdown.

http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php?topic=69935.msg855000#msg855000


However, from Randy's comments, we can conclude otherwise.

We can safely say that GGG is definitely NOT the manufacturer of the new SpinTrak :

It's unfortunate, however, that the "adoption" of yet another one of my concepts is necessary for him to "compete".  Apologies for the snark, but this is just about as sleazy as it gets.

[patrickl]

For 18 months after the release of the TT2 (which has 1,200 transitions per revolution - the same as the "new" SpinTrak), the old SpinTrak (at a lower 1,000 transitions per revolution) persisted with this boast on the webpage :

The highest-resolution rotary control ever produced for arcade gaming use.

...

Resolution of 1000 transitions per revolution makes this the only control ever to match the Arkanoid Trackwheel ...

The original SpinTrak came out before the TT2 and at that time it had the highest resolution.

[RandyT]

For 18 months after the release of the TT2 (which has 1,200 transitions per revolution - the same as the "new" SpinTrak), the old SpinTrak (at a lower 1,000 transitions per revolution) persisted with this boast on the webpage :

The highest-resolution rotary control ever produced for arcade gaming use.

...

Resolution of 1000 transitions per revolution makes this the only control ever to match the Arkanoid Trackwheel ...

The original SpinTrak came out before the TT2 and at that time it had the highest resolution.

And well before that, the original TurboTwist had the highest resolution, and it also played Arkanoid perfectly.

RandyT

[TPB]

The original SpinTrak came out before the TT2 and at that time it had the highest resolution.

True.

But the TT2 was released shortly afterwards, which was at least 18 months ago.

You'd think that 18 months is a sufficient period of time in which to "update a superceded claim" on a webpage.

Having said that, Ultimarc has never had a flashy website.  They instead focus their energies in better placed areas, such as on the quality of their products, customer support, and new product innovations.

No-one would argue with those areas having a higher priority and focus, than their website.

[patrickl]

Based on this insight from Andy, I had thought the new SpinTrak might turn out to be an Enhanced and Re-badged TT2.

Andy talks of a new agreement with a "manufacturer with an off-the-shelf product".  Possibly the manufacturer could have been GGG ? :

Or maybe Andy buys the same off-the-shelf product that GGG buys?

[RandyT]

Based on this insight from Andy, I had thought the new SpinTrak might turn out to be an Enhanced and Re-badged TT2.

Andy talks of a new agreement with a "manufacturer with an off-the-shelf product".  Possibly the manufacturer could have been GGG ? :

Or maybe Andy buys the same off-the-shelf product that GGG buys?

I sincerely hope you are just trolling with that statement.  The TT2 is a 100% GGG product, invented and developed by yours truly.  The metal body is done in a little shop in PA by a very skilled machinist, who depends on jobs like the ones I send him to make his his living.  And the rest is manufactured / assembled by us in order to help make ours.

RandyT

[AndyWarne]

The reason why our Spintrak webpage was not updated was because we discontinued the original unit some 8 months ago. So it was not available for purchase, out of stock in the store all of this time.

Our original Spintrak was designed before SMD reflective quadrature sensors were available, to enable the sensor to be made sufficiently small, and also much cheaper than before. This is why we discontinued it, because technology had advanced and we wished to take advantage of it. There was no reason to continue using a two-element transmissive sensor when one single SMD chip would work.
From the look of the TT2 I would think it uses a packaged sensor module from www.usdigital.com. When this package became available it made absolute sense to use it in this application. But in fact we did find a manufacturer who was already making a complete compact encoder unit using an SMD reflective sensor chip. They are an "offshore" company (Not China) and our unit has their part number with a suffix for the type of connector we specified.

I do not consider adopting new technology "sleazy" just because another supplier is also using this technology. The KeyWiz uses the same chip as the I-PAC, no problem with that.

On the subject of USB 2.0 vs 1.1.
Using USB 1.1 gives a maximum data packet of 7 bits in each direction (8 bits total) ie 127 increments. The "poll rate" unless it is artificially increased is approx 7ms.
This means with 1200 pulses per revolution, that is 9.5 data packets per revolution which (in an ideal situation) would take 66.5 ms. This equates to a maximum speed of 15 revs per second. In testing we found it is easy to exceed this in gaming especially on "transients". Twisting the knob quickly easily exceeds 127 pulses.
USB 2.0 uses 15-bit data in each direction (in this case) and a faster poll rate and so there is no realistic restriction at all. The counter in the interface is 16 bits wide so can count any possible transient "twist".
As far as PS/2 goes, we dumped this altogether. Its quite difficult to calculate a maximum supported speed with PS/2 as there are so many factors, including the fact that the interface has to send each bit individually while trying to deal with the pulses from the encoder. The data rate will be limited to much lower than the theoretical maximum packet rate on the interface. For PS/2 its best to simply test performance. Adjusting mouse speed to lowest in Windows, and spinning at increasing rates. The speed limitation can be observed.
The 127-pulse transient limit also applies in PS/2.
Andy

[TPB]

From Andy's explanation, a USB 2.0 interface is beneficial with a high resolution spinner.

Let's face it guys, you've both "adopted" the spinner "concept" from the arcade game manufacturers.  No-one has a monopoly on the spinner.

Both the SpinTrak and TT2 are great products.

Andy - given this is a SpinTrak thread, can I ask a question :

>>  The SpinTrak appears with a nice-looking Red knob (SlikStik style) on the product webpage.  However, the Red knobs are not available on the order page.  Will they be made available ?   

[AndyWarne]

Thanks for the alert, forgot to add the red to the store. Have now done so.

Andy

[Dazz]

Hmmm, anyone know if my Oscar MAME engraved tops fit this?

[RandyT]

I do not consider adopting new technology "sleazy" just because another supplier is also using this technology. The KeyWiz uses the same chip as the I-PAC, no problem with that.

Of course you don't.  You are the one who has engaged in blatant pilfery of my design.  The TT2 design is a 100% new spinner design, and comparing copying it virtually verbatim, to the use of a commonly available  blank microcontroller used by thousands of manufacturers, and which does not contain the tiniest segment of your code is just a dishonest representation of the situation.  Unless you now want folks to believe that you have designed the physical chip.

And those "new surface mount encoder" packages have been around for many months before SlikStik Christian started pushing your "joint effort" Spintrak.  Even if you just found them and started using them, they work just as well attached to a mounting plate like the one in your design. There is no justification you can use for taking mine as your own, regardless of what you want folks to believe.

On the subject of USB 2.0 vs 1.1.
Using USB 1.1 gives a maximum data packet of 7 bits in each direction (8 bits total) ie 127 increments. The "poll rate" unless it is artificially increased is approx 7ms.

Any setting you make on a system that is not left in it's default state is an "artificial increase".  Change one setting on an XP system and things are no longer the case as you have just described them.  A 98SE system doesn't even require that for your spiel to cease holding water.  Installing a driver that does the exact same thing is no significant difference.  Hundreds of good folks have praised the TT2, with it's current interface, for it's unmatched performance.  This would not be so, were there any reason whatsoever to switch to a 2.0 interface. 

Doing so just requires that you give up PS/2 compatibility, and requires you to buy a new USB hub / interface card if yours isn't 2.0 compatible.

RandyT

[RoomTenONine]

Just some thoughts from someone who is on the cusp of ordering an encoder, spinner and other parts for a new CP.

Respectively to those involved, the comments regarding stealing design ideas come off as petty bickering.  I'm not saying they are or are not warranted as I don't have the full details (nor do I really care), but I don't see how this can be considered design theft (in claims from both parties).  Being first to market with a new design idea that becomes popular will be mirrored...unless of course you go get the appropriate patent.  By your rationale every car manufacturer making V6 engines today and in the past are pilfering from Lancia and their original V6 design.  Yes, other engines had existed before and even inline 6 cyls, but the V6 was a milestone in design...and EVERYONE except the exotics use them.  The same can be said for joystik designs.  I don't know who made the fist 8-way microswitch stik or leaf switch, but obviously everyone making current controls copies those designs.

From what I've read, both companies here offer great products and customer support.  I'd much rather see you two one-up each other in products and customer support than holler about who's idea it was.

[RandyT]

...unless of course you go get the appropriate patent. 

This process was actually started some time ago.  Ergo, this issue.

I'm sorry you see this as something petty.  It's hard to understand as an outsider.  But consider how you might feel if you worked months on a project for your company that meant a fat raise and a boost in the quality of living for your family, and another individual in your office photocopied and submitted it, thereby claiming the fruits of your labor?  Is that also a case of "that's the way the cookie crumbles"?  How is that so different?

RandyT

[RoomTenONine]

...unless of course you go get the appropriate patent. 

This process was actually started some time ago.  Ergo, this issue.

And it wasn't successful or is just taking a while?  Have the right attorney working on it?

I'm sorry you see this as something petty.  It's hard to understand as an outsider.  But consider how you might feel if you worked months on a project for your company that meant a fat raise and a boost in the quality of living for your family, and another individual in your office photocopied and submitted it, thereby claiming the fruits of your labor?  Is that also a case of "that's the way the cookie crumbles"?  How is that so different?

It is different.  The office scenario is someone stealing your idea before you had a chance to present/submit it and getting all the credit.  In the case of the spinners you got to present your product first.  That said, I understand the frustration of having potential income leeched by competition, especially when you or your company are the originators.  However, that is what patents, keeping designs secret until they are protected and attorneys are for.  It is a gamble I understand well.  Do you push to market early before a patent or copyright is secured...hoping no one figures it out or do you hold off on making some instant coin in the interest of IP security?  I know how frustrating it is, but this is the norm in nearly all areas of industry.

That said, I'm still very interested in your spinner, but I also would like to run a mini-pac (or something similar) with the harness for ease of use.  I'm still very much on the fence.

[vader]

Long Live Ultimarc.

I seriously doubt he has no problem whatsoever competing with you.  What he may not have in product lineup he more than makes up in the way he treats people.  You really need to step back and look at what you type before attacking a much more respected member of this community than yourself.

[RandyT]

And it wasn't successful or is just taking a while?  Have the right attorney working on it?

Obviously you have never prosecuted a patent application (BTW, I have 3 published).  It's a long process to get one issued.

It is different.  The office scenario is someone stealing your idea before you had a chance to present/submit it and getting all the credit.

Again, I fully understand all aspects of IP protection.  I have even tried to offer "non-legal" advice about it here from time to time.  But it is not so different.  All a new potential customer, such as yourself,  sees is two virtually identical designs.  How do I now get a chance to "present my idea first", thus getting the "credit".  If nothing else, this post will help serve as a footnote in the history of its creation that can be referenced by interested entities.

RandyT

[RandyT]

What he may not have in product lineup he more than makes up in the way he treats people.  You really need to step back and look at what you type before attacking a much more respected member of this community than yourself.

I have no interest in competing for your favor.  Your posts pretty much point out how futile that endeavor will be.

My customers know much better who I am than you purport to.

RandyT

[Shoegazer]

Hey Andy,

Your new SpinTrak spinner looks awesome and I'm right about at the point where I'm interested in getting a replacement for my Tornado, sooo... a few questions for ya:

1) Will there be a wheel add-on option?  If so, will it pivot on an axis via gear and stand?  My spinner is close to the monitor glass so a wheel larger than say 4" would not be possible, plus it's nice to have a wheel actually facing you of course.. :-) If this is not possible I'd still be interested in a small wheel top if you'll make one available.

2) From the pictures, it looks like the SpinTrak uses a standard Happ button mount rather than the Tornado's pinhole mount - am I right?  If so, I assume I'll need to create a larger hole in my SlikStik classic panel?

3) Will the SpinTrak work with Vista through a USB hub?  My old Tornado will work through a hub in XP, but not Vista.

Thanks in advance for answering, Andy.  Your products (and customer service) are just excellent.

Shoegazer

[KevSteele]

Wait. I'm confused. Andy's product is some "off the shelf" product from another manufacturer with his interface, right?

Then how did he blatantly rip off RandyT's design? Sounds like someone else already has a spinner similar to Randy's out there...

[RandyT]

Wait. I'm confused. Andy's product is some "off the shelf" product from another manufacturer with his interface, right?

Then how did he blatantly rip off RandyT's design? Sounds like someone else already has a spinner similar to Randy's out there...

The "encoder module" that sits below the spinner body is "off the shelf".  Everything else is not.  It seems like there is intentional confusion between the two.

This would be akin to stating that the High-Low is "off the shelf" because it too uses the same type of  encoder module as the TT2.

Of course, if this is not the case, and a knockoff is being produced and sold by another company, I'd be interested in knowing who this is.

RandyT

[AndyWarne]

Note that we were the first to launch a spinner with a rear-mounted detachable flywheel. When the TT2 was launched with this feature I didnt say a thing.

When a version of the KeyWiz was launched which has the same connector layout as the I-PAC I didnt either. Just seemed to be a reasonable advance as its a neater layout than the original.

I remember when the TT1 was launched thinking how much like the Tornado it seemed. A good product nevertheless.


Andy

[KevSteele]

So the encoder is off-the-shelf, the interface is Andy's, and the spinner hardware is what you feel is being copied, right? The "push-button size" mount, correct?

I know patents can take a long time, but if the submission's been made, you probably should put a "Patent Pending" on your site. Hopefully there's no prior patent on a similar design, but that's what takes so long for Patent Lawyers.

[AndyWarne]

Wait. I'm confused. Andy's product is some "off the shelf" product from another manufacturer with his interface, right?

Then how did he blatantly rip off RandyT's design? Sounds like someone else already has a spinner similar to Randy's out there...

Indeed. The entire unit is a DIN-standard encoder. The manufacturers part number is ENC 33/6DS-300AB/5V

Dont forget these are not really just "spinners" but standard incremental encoders used in many industrial applications. The actual encoder PCB and optical wheel is not something bolted on, we buy the entire unit. I do know that the optical part is not the US Digital unit but is the manufacturers own.
At the moment we have units which have the DIN standard connector pinout so we are having to re-jig the connector pinout as ours is different.

[RandyT]

..you probably should put a "Patent Pending" on your site. Hopefully there's no prior patent on a similar design, but that's what takes so long for Patent Lawyers.

Thanks for the advice, but it's been there since the process was started, as well as included in the documentation that ships with them. 

Note that we were the first to launch a spinner with a rear-mounted detachable flywheel. When the TT2 was launched with this feature I didnt say a thing.

There is no other way to design a "flywheel" for my design and it was in development long before Christian started showing yours. 

When a version of the KeyWiz was launched which has the same connector layout as the I-PAC I didnt either.

It's a simple matter of conserving board space and is hardly an original idea.

I remember when the TT1 was launched thinking how much like the Tornado it seemed. A good product nevertheless.

Thank you.  Of course you would have had to ignore the fact that it was a solid material design, had a resolution that was several times greater, a printed encoder that resides below the frame, and a PCB that also acted as a structural member to stiffen the box design.  But Christian also saw the similarities you did, and went on to attempt to disparage the move toward high resolution spinner devices I was advocating at the time.  The thread is still here for those interested, but sadly it has been chewed up a bit by the forum software.

RandyT

[RoomTenONine]

And it wasn't successful or is just taking a while?  Have the right attorney working on it?

Obviously you have never prosecuted a patent application (BTW, I have 3 published).  It's a long process to get one issued.

I have not personally prosecuted one, although I am familiar with the process professionally.  However, that isn't where my understanding really stems from.  My spouse is a commercial litigation attorney so I'm all too familiar with the length of time it can take on such situations and that it can drag on if things aren't handled correctly from the beginning.  I can see where your design could get caught up in arguments during the patent process.  I also don't notice any patent pending notices with this device, FWIW they may be helpful.

It is different.  The office scenario is someone stealing your idea before you had a chance to present/submit it and getting all the credit.

Again, I fully understand all aspects of IP protection.  I have even tried to offer "non-legal" advice about it here from time to time.  But it is not so different.  All a new potential customer, such as yourself,  sees is two virtually identical designs.  How do I now get a chance to "present my idea first", thus getting the "credit".  If nothing else, this post will help serve as a footnote in the history of its creation that can be referenced by interested entities.

Randy

If you understand IP so well, why are you complaining about your idea being stolen when you could have protected it?  It appears you went to market early either because the patent process was taking too long for your liking and/or you aren't sure if the patent will be successful.  Now that your idea isn't protected and others follow suit you are irked.  I get it, but you are the one that could have prevented this up front.  As it stands it is fair game.

Actually, when I began researching spinners your competitor had nothing to offer me.  You did "present first" to me.  In fact you presented first to the entire industry with this style of footprint.  I was planning on buying your spinner and his interface.  I asked him about connecting spinners from other companies and he honestly informed that is was possible.  He could have easily spun some BS about it not being perfect or that his spinner was better to lure me into buying his products only.  He gave me an honest answer.

Also, I do not see the spinners as virtually identical designs.  All I see are spinners that may or may not fit my needs.  You are the one claiming they are virtually identical by the assertion that the design was copied.

To be honest this discussion is very disappointing.  Here I am defending simple comments about keeping industry arguments away from a post intended to inform others of a product.  This to me is borderline trolling.  There are appropriate and mature ways to handle industry squabbles and hijacking a thread is not one of them.

Edited for messed up quote brackets.

[RandyT]

Then how did he blatantly rip off RandyT's design? Sounds like someone else already has a spinner similar to Randy's out there...

Indeed. The entire unit is a DIN-standard encoder. The manufacturers part number is ENC 33/6DS-300AB/5V

Let me get this straight:  The shaft, bearings, nut, threaded body of the same size and length as an arcade pushbutton is something that you are purchasing, "off the shelf", with no input of specifications by you to the company or being manufactured specifically for you?

Can you provide me with details of the manufacturer?

RandyT

[AndyWarne]

Hey Andy,

1) Will there be a wheel add-on option?  If so, will it pivot on an axis via gear and stand?  My spinner is close to the monitor glass so a wheel larger than say 4" would not be possible, plus it's nice to have a wheel actually facing you of course.. :-) If this is not possible I'd still be interested in a small wheel top if you'll make one available.

We will not be making available a wheel option unfortunately because I believe the 6mm shaft is too thin to reliably support a relatively large wheel without the risk of getting bent.

2) From the pictures, it looks like the SpinTrak uses a standard Happ button mount rather than the Tornado's pinhole mount - am I right?  If so, I assume I'll need to create a larger hole in my SlikStik classic panel?

It requires a 28mm hole.

3) Will the SpinTrak work with Vista through a USB hub?  My old Tornado will work through a hub in XP, but not Vista.

Strange that the Tornado did not work in Vista. It will be fine in Vista.

[RandyT]

If you understand IP so well, why are you complaining about your idea being stolen when you could have protected it?

I'm not exactly sure why you believe it is not protected?  Not currently against competition, but we both know that.  That is why it is being brought up here, and not in an attorney's office, in order to point out that doing such a thing is an unsavory business practice that sets the stage for future interaction between vendors.  I have taken note of this and will, sadly, adjust my practices accordingly.

In any event, there's nothing more I can add here, so I will bow out.  They say time heals all wounds, so I'll let the process begin.

RandyT

[HaRuMaN]

 

[RoomTenONine]

If you understand IP so well, why are you complaining about your idea being stolen when you could have protected it?

I'm not exactly sure why you believe it is not protected?  Not currently against competition, but we both know that.  That is why it is being brought up here, and not in an attorney's office, in order to point out that doing such a thing is an unsavory business practice that sets the stage for future interaction between vendors.  I have taken note of this and will, sadly, adjust my practices accordingly.

In any event, there's nothing more I can add here, so I will bow out.  They say time heals all wounds, so I'll let the process begin.

RandyT

Legally speaking you have little recourse at this point because you do not have a patent.  What's not to understand about that.  You could have waited for the patent to go through, release the product and then (legally speaking) you'd have a valid complaint.  Otherwise your argument is really weak.  Like I said I understand your frustration, but to say that it is 100% unsavory for a company to emulate a good design that isn't patented puts a bad taste in my mouth and comes off as finger pointing and whiny.  By your rationale any company making flat panel plasma TV is unsavory for "stealing" the idea from the guys at U. of Illinois who came up with it in the 60's!  The same rationale would damn any company making modern rubber tires the likes of which Charles Goodyear invented.  Going even further, those people actually invented the technology as a whole.  You've streamlined an already established device that you did not invent.  Not to say that the change wasn't amazing (it is), but you are acting as if some horrible wrong has befallen you simply for having your un-patented idea used by a direct competitor.

Edit: The more I think about this the more I realize I am being too quick to say "You should have had the patent first, Randy".  Yes that process would have protected him, but the length and cost of such things are very prohibitive for small businesses.  In addition Randy pushed something to market that benefits our niche community before his legal rear was covered.  Some may see that as foolish whim as I initially implied, but the more I think about it, the more I see this as Randy making a sacrifice to help the BYOAC enthisiasts.  I apologize to Randy if I came across as callous or speaking out without fully understanding the situation between GGG and Ultimarc and who brought different innovations to market first.

[Shoegazer]

Hey Andy,

1) Will there be a wheel add-on option?  If so, will it pivot on an axis via gear and stand?  My spinner is close to the monitor glass so a wheel larger than say 4" would not be possible, plus it's nice to have a wheel actually facing you of course.. :-) If this is not possible I'd still be interested in a small wheel top if you'll make one available.

We will not be making available a wheel option unfortunately because I believe the 6mm shaft is too thin to reliably support a relatively large wheel without the risk of getting bent.

That's unfortunate.  I may actually need to buy the TT2 spinner since a wheel option is very important to me.  Anyone know if the TT2 spinner will work in a SlikStik classic panel easily (Randy)?  Are there any issues with the KeyWiz harness I should be aware of?

2) From the pictures, it looks like the SpinTrak uses a standard Happ button mount rather than the Tornado's pinhole mount - am I right?  If so, I assume I'll need to create a larger hole in my SlikStik classic panel?

It requires a 28mm hole.

3) Will the SpinTrak work with Vista through a USB hub?  My old Tornado will work through a hub in XP, but not Vista.

Strange that the Tornado did not work in Vista. It will be fine in Vista.

It does work in Vista, just not through a hub.  I assumed this was some flaw in the Tornado driver, but then, since the Tornado was not designed at a time when Vista was around, it's completely forgivable.  Also I'm not using any special drivers, just whatever is installed when you plug in the spinner in - is there an option to update?

[RandyT]

Anyone know if the TT2 spinner will work in a SlikStik classic panel easily (Randy)?

PM sent.

[AndyWarne]

Then how did he blatantly rip off RandyT's design? Sounds like someone else already has a spinner similar to Randy's out there...

Indeed. The entire unit is a DIN-standard encoder. The manufacturers part number is ENC 33/6DS-300AB/5V

Let me get this straight:  The shaft, bearings, nut, threaded body of the same size and length as an arcade pushbutton is something that you are purchasing, "off the shelf", with no input of specifications by you to the company or being manufactured specifically for you?

Can you provide me with details of the manufacturer?

RandyT

Any manufacturer who is designing a compact encoder using the Avago SMT reflective sensor chip will follow the Avago spec in terms of the diameter of the optical wheel and this would dictate the minimum overall diameter of the unit so any design using this technology would end up being approximately this size.
Although incremental encoders have many applications there was one main usage which this unit was aimed at, which was monitoring production line motion, having a rubber wheel attached to it, and mounted on a spring-loaded arm so needing to be compact and light.
We did specify the resolution and they were able to produce higher than their standard.
We also beat them up on price...