rec.autos.simulators

by **Shum** » Fri, 07 Jan 2000 04:00:00

Thank you..... you have just completely backed up what I have been saying
all along. The current implementations of USB in controllers today are
GARBAGE. They apparently have NO idea what they are doing, and why should
they.... they have been designing game controllers for the standard gameport
in basic analog configurations, and left the interfacing responsibilities to
the sound card companies and the gamecard companies.

You'll actually find that most USB controllers out there are using "default
USB" algorithms that are supplied by the chip manufacturers (some decide to
get creative and do some minor tweaks such as cutting into the positioning
resolution to stabilize the jitter). Then we get into FF USB and we find out
that all are using the Immersion Chip.... the only thing is.... Immersion
WILL NOT allow the algorithms to be altered. They will not even release it
to you in code format. So all FF controllers are stuck with Immersion's
algorithm that is specialized towards FF and NOT positioning.

We (PDPI) are taking a COMPLETELY different approach and have the advantage
of being a "interface company" before we become a controller company. We are
fully aware of the intricacies of USB design (since it's our field) and have
made extraordinary advancements in the ways of proprietary algorithms that
incorporate all of the features that made the L4 such a great interface. The
other guys are quite a ways back from us.... and that's because we have been
engaged in interface R/D exclusively since 1993. Frankly.... we are years
ahead and the other guys told/know it.

We are confident that you will be extremely impressed with our
implementations. ECCI and TSW are scratching at the door to license it and
have been hesitant to enter into USB because of the brutal implementations
to date. They saw our, and had to have it.

I'm not going to go into the intricacies of the technology on here... the
competition will have to wait for our arrival in the marketplace before they
see what we have done to leave them in the dust.

Cheers,

Shumi

by **Karl Zose** » Fri, 07 Jan 2000 04:00:00

What does this mean, Schumi?

IS the resulution of the CURRENT available L4 ports better than 8 bits
(range 0-255)???

Yes or no?

Karl

by **Karl Zose** » Fri, 07 Jan 2000 04:00:00

Anyway Schumi, I think u should send me a L4 port for free , for putting so
much attention for your product by asking the original question on this
channel: Why is the PDPI L4 gamecard not more popular? (I now how to start a
discussion)

Check out how many people answered: By now EVERYBODY must know what a PDPI
L4 gameport is :)

Happy New Year

If i get one for free, I wouldnt have to put more effort into convincing my
wife I really NEED a L4 :)

by **Shum** » Fri, 07 Jan 2000 04:00:00

Compare the nearest compare-sake in the Logi at 128 positioning resolution
(roughly every second degree of turn accounted for) and then look at twice
that with 256 and I'd say that was a dramatic improvement in resolution. We
have bettered that exponentially without USB interface.

You see more "total" ticks in the interface with other wheels..... but I can
guarantee you that not "every tick" is accounted for in wheel position. In
fact..... they inflate the overall spectrum to make room for more ticks they
can buffer in between to combat the mechanical jitter. It's a double edged
sword.... and don't be "taken" by the total number of ticks as the
positioning resolution..... it simply isn't the case.

The L4 is currently running an 8-bit positioning resolution and that maxes
the ability at 256. However... all 256 ticks represent a wheel position, and
it is ROCK SOLID in stability, precision, performance, and responsiveness.
Keep in mind that current USB interfaces are also using 8-bit USB chip
outputs, and really have NO advantage over the L4 in "ability" regarding
positioning resolution.

I realize that I am being vague in my replies regarding our "current
achievements", but that is because it is sensitive information that we would
not like to share with the competition. I only started posting massively on
this NG because I sensed an air of frustration from you guys, and noticed a
lot of uninformed advice floating around regarding "which is the better
wheel". I started to post what we are working on so that you guys could have
the peace of mind to know that someone IS listening.... someone CAN give you
what you want, and something WILL be available soon at an affordable price.

If the other guys are high jumping 10 feet right now..... we are jumping
2000 feet. Please be patient and you will have the things you are asking for
very soon.

Cheers,

Shumi

> > [snip]
> > I know for a fact that if you dont see a major Improvement with the L4
it's
> > simply not configured correctly.

> Please tell me how to configure my L4 to increase the resolution.
> I haven't been able to get more than 256 ticks out of it, and that
> just isn't enough to make it a major improvement in precision.

> _
> Mats Lofkvist

by **Shum** » Fri, 07 Jan 2000 04:00:00

No..... the L4 is limited to 256 positioning resolution (8-bit output).
However..... all wheels on the market using USB are using an 8-bit USB chip
as well..... they just explode the positioning resolution "spectrum" to
accommodate larger buffers to combat the mechanical jitter. You can explode
the positioning resolution "spectrum" all you want (to a limit of
16,535)..... but you're still only left with a maximum of 256 positions that
represent a position of the wheel. Don't be fooled by what GPL shows..... it
shows the spectrum..... not the resolution.

Cheers,

Shumi

> > We have increased the positioning resolution "exponentially" over the L4
> > (which still kicks ass over current USB implementations). How does
> "accuracy
> > to within 1/5th of a degree of turn on a 230 radius" sound to you?

> What does this mean, Schumi?

> IS the resulution of the CURRENT available L4 ports better than 8 bits
> (range 0-255)???

> Yes or no?

> Karl

by **Timothy Mora** » Sat, 08 Jan 2000 04:00:00

Ok Shumi, controllers, etc. are in the works, but is a newer higher
resolution version of the L4, USB or otherwise, in the works? My ECCI is
connected to an L4, and would love higher resolution.

THM

> Thank you..... you have just completely backed up what I have been saying
> all along. The current implementations of USB in controllers today are
> GARBAGE. They apparently have NO idea what they are doing, and why should
> they.... they have been designing game controllers for the standard
gameport
> in basic analog configurations, and left the interfacing responsibilities
to
> the sound card companies and the gamecard companies.

> You'll actually find that most USB controllers out there are using
"default
> USB" algorithms that are supplied by the chip manufacturers (some decide
to
> get creative and do some minor tweaks such as cutting into the positioning
> resolution to stabilize the jitter). Then we get into FF USB and we find
out
> that all are using the Immersion Chip.... the only thing is.... Immersion
> WILL NOT allow the algorithms to be altered. They will not even release it
> to you in code format. So all FF controllers are stuck with Immersion's
> algorithm that is specialized towards FF and NOT positioning.

> We (PDPI) are taking a COMPLETELY different approach and have the
advantage
> of being a "interface company" before we become a controller company. We
are
> fully aware of the intricacies of USB design (since it's our field) and
have
> made extraordinary advancements in the ways of proprietary algorithms that
> incorporate all of the features that made the L4 such a great interface.
The
> other guys are quite a ways back from us.... and that's because we have
been
> engaged in interface R/D exclusively since 1993. Frankly.... we are years
> ahead and the other guys told/know it.

> We are confident that you will be extremely impressed with our
> implementations. ECCI and TSW are scratching at the door to license it and
> have been hesitant to enter into USB because of the brutal implementations
> to date. They saw our, and had to have it.

> I'm not going to go into the intricacies of the technology on here... the
> competition will have to wait for our arrival in the marketplace before
they
> see what we have done to leave them in the dust.

> Cheers,

> Shumi

> > i don't get the observations you guys seem to have, since i have found
the
> > opposite to be true about this subject ,

> > going from a standard game port to an accelerated port was one of the
> > biggest improvements ever i have made in my *** system, the CPU
usage
> > went to nill, and the response and presicion are impecable .
> > i tried a usb wheel and found it to stop play and use more CPU and get
> > confused , get lost, and basically suck compared to a controller on the
> > accelerated game port.
> > i never have to calibrate my wheel , i don't get any hesitation, and my
> > controller in no way slows down game play, which is completely unlike
what
> i
> > experienced when using a usb controller

> > i think the fad of usb is a joke for game controllers,
> > we have a dedicated port on the system for controllers,(joystick port)
and
> > mine is far superior to a "Universal" port of USB, which has to be
> > interpalated into DX game controllers in software somehow,

> > anyway i have the opposite opinion about this USB crap, I hate it for
my
> > controllers ,
> > it may be alright for cameras and scanners, but not for wheels,

by **Peter Ive** » Sat, 08 Jan 2000 04:00:00

<snip>

What about longevity. I've heard that the PDPI doesn't support digital
at the moment and I'm hoping that digital controllers will be more
longer lasting than the current crop of ones that use pots. Will your
new controllers be digital and, if not, what are the comparisons between
digital and non-digital controllers longevity-wise?
--
Peter Ives - (AKA Ivington)

No person's opinions can be said to be
more correct than another's, because each is
the sole judge of his or her own experience.

by **Shum** » Sat, 08 Jan 2000 04:00:00

Talking to ECCI about a "PDPI Kit" that you will be able to buy exclusively
for the ECCI wheels. We are also talking to TSW about producing the same
kits. Basically, you remove the SG innards, and replace it with USB innards.
Sounds complicated.... but it's really not if you've every cracked either of
the two wheels open.

Nothing firm yet.... but we are in discussions.

As for a "higher resolution L4"... we are also considering this, and the new
design would be in a PCI configuration if we decided to move forward on it.
I'm not going to give out numbers... but it would be the equivalent to our
USB resolutions. I'll keep you posted on it.... but be aware that this
project would have to take a back seat to others we are currently involved
in.

Cheers,

Shumi

P.S. 256 positioning resolution accounts for every degree of turn when using
the L4. Furthermore... you have a patented filtering system to remove the
jitter (we will use the same in USB configs.), and we also incorporate what
we call "hysteresis". This hysteresis theoretically gives you a 512
positioning resolution since it can differentiate down to half of a
positioning resolution unit. Meaning... you have 256 resolution... but it
doesn't move over to the unit beside it until it has sensed a wheel travel
of .5 degrees. In fact this is what makes us so precise. Other wheels
(particularly USB) move to the next available unit (sometimes 6-10 steps
over), as soon as the wheel is moved even slightly beyond the unit. Meaning
you get "overshoots" in the positioning (which many have experienced on this
NG). We don't get that because of our hysteresis. So in ending... I'm not
sure why you think it's imprecise... it's the best you can buy in this day
and age, and I'll pay $100.00 US to anyone who can show me something that
does better currently or past.

> Ok Shumi, controllers, etc. are in the works, but is a newer higher
> resolution version of the L4, USB or otherwise, in the works? My ECCI is
> connected to an L4, and would love higher resolution.

> THM

> > Thank you..... you have just completely backed up what I have been
saying
> > all along. The current implementations of USB in controllers today are
> > GARBAGE. They apparently have NO idea what they are doing, and why
should
> > they.... they have been designing game controllers for the standard
> gameport
> > in basic analog configurations, and left the interfacing
responsibilities
> to
> > the sound card companies and the gamecard companies.

> > You'll actually find that most USB controllers out there are using
> "default
> > USB" algorithms that are supplied by the chip manufacturers (some decide
> to
> > get creative and do some minor tweaks such as cutting into the
positioning
> > resolution to stabilize the jitter). Then we get into FF USB and we find
> out
> > that all are using the Immersion Chip.... the only thing is....
Immersion
> > WILL NOT allow the algorithms to be altered. They will not even release
it
> > to you in code format. So all FF controllers are stuck with Immersion's
> > algorithm that is specialized towards FF and NOT positioning.

> > We (PDPI) are taking a COMPLETELY different approach and have the
> advantage
> > of being a "interface company" before we become a controller company. We
> are
> > fully aware of the intricacies of USB design (since it's our field) and
> have
> > made extraordinary advancements in the ways of proprietary algorithms
that
> > incorporate all of the features that made the L4 such a great interface.
> The
> > other guys are quite a ways back from us.... and that's because we have
> been
> > engaged in interface R/D exclusively since 1993. Frankly.... we are
years
> > ahead and the other guys told/know it.

> > We are confident that you will be extremely impressed with our
> > implementations. ECCI and TSW are scratching at the door to license it
and
> > have been hesitant to enter into USB because of the brutal
implementations
> > to date. They saw our, and had to have it.

> > I'm not going to go into the intricacies of the technology on here...
the
> > competition will have to wait for our arrival in the marketplace before
> they
> > see what we have done to leave them in the dust.

> > Cheers,

> > Shumi

> > > i don't get the observations you guys seem to have, since i have found
> the
> > > opposite to be true about this subject ,

> > > going from a standard game port to an accelerated port was one of the
> > > biggest improvements ever i have made in my *** system, the CPU
> usage
> > > went to nill, and the response and presicion are impecable .
> > > i tried a usb wheel and found it to stop play and use more CPU and get
> > > confused , get lost, and basically suck compared to a controller on
the
> > > accelerated game port.
> > > i never have to calibrate my wheel , i don't get any hesitation, and
my
> > > controller in no way slows down game play, which is completely unlike
> what
> > i
> > > experienced when using a usb controller

> > > i think the fad of usb is a joke for game controllers,
> > > we have a dedicated port on the system for controllers,(joystick port)
> and
> > > mine is far superior to a "Universal" port of USB, which has to be
> > > interpalated into DX game controllers in software somehow,

> > > anyway i have the opposite opinion about this USB crap, I hate it
for
> my
> > > controllers ,
> > > it may be alright for cameras and scanners, but not for wheels,

by **Timothy Mora** » Sat, 08 Jan 2000 04:00:00

Good news.

BTW, I didn't say it was imprecise, I just said I'd love higher resolution
(i.e., even higher resolution).

THM

> Talking to ECCI about a "PDPI Kit" that you will be able to buy
exclusively
> for the ECCI wheels. We are also talking to TSW about producing the same
> kits. Basically, you remove the SG innards, and replace it with USB
innards.
> Sounds complicated.... but it's really not if you've every cracked either
of
> the two wheels open.

> Nothing firm yet.... but we are in discussions.

> As for a "higher resolution L4"... we are also considering this, and the
new
> design would be in a PCI configuration if we decided to move forward on
it.
> I'm not going to give out numbers... but it would be the equivalent to our
> USB resolutions. I'll keep you posted on it.... but be aware that this
> project would have to take a back seat to others we are currently involved
> in.

> Cheers,

> Shumi

> P.S. 256 positioning resolution accounts for every degree of turn when
using
> the L4. Furthermore... you have a patented filtering system to remove the
> jitter (we will use the same in USB configs.), and we also incorporate
what
> we call "hysteresis". This hysteresis theoretically gives you a 512
> positioning resolution since it can differentiate down to half of a
> positioning resolution unit. Meaning... you have 256 resolution... but it
> doesn't move over to the unit beside it until it has sensed a wheel travel
> of .5 degrees. In fact this is what makes us so precise. Other wheels
> (particularly USB) move to the next available unit (sometimes 6-10 steps
> over), as soon as the wheel is moved even slightly beyond the unit.
Meaning
> you get "overshoots" in the positioning (which many have experienced on
this
> NG). We don't get that because of our hysteresis. So in ending... I'm not
> sure why you think it's imprecise... it's the best you can buy in this day
> and age, and I'll pay $100.00 US to anyone who can show me something that
> does better currently or past.

> > Ok Shumi, controllers, etc. are in the works, but is a newer higher
> > resolution version of the L4, USB or otherwise, in the works? My ECCI
is
> > connected to an L4, and would love higher resolution.

> > THM

> > > Thank you..... you have just completely backed up what I have been
> saying
> > > all along. The current implementations of USB in controllers today are
> > > GARBAGE. They apparently have NO idea what they are doing, and why
> should
> > > they.... they have been designing game controllers for the standard
> > gameport
> > > in basic analog configurations, and left the interfacing
> responsibilities
> > to
> > > the sound card companies and the gamecard companies.

> > > You'll actually find that most USB controllers out there are using
> > "default
> > > USB" algorithms that are supplied by the chip manufacturers (some
decide
> > to
> > > get creative and do some minor tweaks such as cutting into the
> positioning
> > > resolution to stabilize the jitter). Then we get into FF USB and we
find
> > out
> > > that all are using the Immersion Chip.... the only thing is....
> Immersion
> > > WILL NOT allow the algorithms to be altered. They will not even
release
> it
> > > to you in code format. So all FF controllers are stuck with
Immersion's
> > > algorithm that is specialized towards FF and NOT positioning.

> > > We (PDPI) are taking a COMPLETELY different approach and have the
> > advantage
> > > of being a "interface company" before we become a controller company.
We
> > are
> > > fully aware of the intricacies of USB design (since it's our field)
and
> > have
> > > made extraordinary advancements in the ways of proprietary algorithms
> that
> > > incorporate all of the features that made the L4 such a great
interface.
> > The
> > > other guys are quite a ways back from us.... and that's because we
have
> > been
> > > engaged in interface R/D exclusively since 1993. Frankly.... we are
> years
> > > ahead and the other guys told/know it.

> > > We are confident that you will be extremely impressed with our
> > > implementations. ECCI and TSW are scratching at the door to license it
> and
> > > have been hesitant to enter into USB because of the brutal
> implementations
> > > to date. They saw our, and had to have it.

> > > I'm not going to go into the intricacies of the technology on here...
> the
> > > competition will have to wait for our arrival in the marketplace
before
> > they
> > > see what we have done to leave them in the dust.

> > > Cheers,

> > > Shumi

> > > > i don't get the observations you guys seem to have, since i have
found
> > the
> > > > opposite to be true about this subject ,

> > > > going from a standard game port to an accelerated port was one of
the
> > > > biggest improvements ever i have made in my *** system, the CPU
> > usage
> > > > went to nill, and the response and presicion are impecable .
> > > > i tried a usb wheel and found it to stop play and use more CPU and
get
> > > > confused , get lost, and basically suck compared to a controller on
> the
> > > > accelerated game port.
> > > > i never have to calibrate my wheel , i don't get any hesitation, and
> my
> > > > controller in no way slows down game play, which is completely
unlike
> > what
> > > i
> > > > experienced when using a usb controller

> > > > i think the fad of usb is a joke for game controllers,
> > > > we have a dedicated port on the system for controllers,(joystick
port)
> > and
> > > > mine is far superior to a "Universal" port of USB, which has to be
> > > > interpalated into DX game controllers in software somehow,

> > > > anyway i have the opposite opinion about this USB crap, I hate it
> for
> > my
> > > > controllers ,
> > > > it may be alright for cameras and scanners, but not for wheels,

by **Shum** » Sat, 08 Jan 2000 04:00:00

You've been subscribing to the wrong advice I'm afraid. Potentiometers do
not make a wheel analog. Yes the potentiometers will send analog signals to
the USB chip, but the USB chip in turn translates that analog information
into digital bits that the computer can understand natively. So in the
end... ALL USB wheels are digital. Contrary to what anyone else tells you.

Now... having said that. I am assuming that you are inferring about
electro-optical sensors that Microsoft utilizes(poorly I might add...). We
have not decided on the positioning mechanisms in the controller themselves
as yet... but it makes little difference to us (we can use either, or...).
We are trying to pack as much value and performance into our controllers as
possible... but we have to keep a lid on the cost/unit. Let's face it... we
could build the ULTIMATE racing wheel for yas... but it would contend with
the prices of TSW and ECCI (which isn't good business... let's be honest
here...). We can solve where Microsoft went wrong (and have already done
it...), but those electro-optical sensors are a bit pricey to be honest (one
of the reasons the MSFF was among the pricier of the FF wheels). Especially
when you compare it to the Pots which work equally as well performance wise
(I'll have a chat with anyone who wants to debate this with cold hard
data.).

So... I have to bring you to a thought..... If you were to drive your real
car for the same period of time, with the same force of control as your Sim
wheel each day.... how many miles do you think you would have on it after 2
years? Or even 1 year for that matter. I think if you thought about it...
you could see yourself taking it for an oil change or three, a new set of
tires, new sparkies, a timing belt change, maybe new brakes, and maybe even
a few burned out lights along the way. Now ask yourself how much THAT would
cost you, and come back and tell me that a $25.00 potentiometer change after
2 years on your wheel you spent less than $200.00 US on is such a bad
investment for servicing/repair. Let's face it folks... we are using
"mechanically operated devices" here... They wear out... it's just a fact of
life we unfortunately have to live with, and have so for a century+.

I have a TSW Formula 99 sitting beside me now (that I currently use in
League races) and I have changed 3 pots within a 1.5 year period. I did it
without regret or angst since I know that I use it quite a bit, and it was
worth it to shell out the $75.00 to keep it happy. I considered it necessary
servicing after prolonged beating.

I cannot give you a firm answer as far as what will be used in PDPI
controllers... but we will do our best to make sure it lasts as long as the
performance is acceptable by standard. We are certainly looking into the
electro-optical sensors... but we want everyone to be able to afford this
wheel's price tag at the retail shops. Time and budget crunching will tell
after all is said and done during design.

I will say this though (I have to....). We will not put a product out there
that will break 6 months into use. We already have a team of beta testers
from around the world for numerous controllers we are working on, and they
will be given the instructions; "Beat the Snot out of it... and tell us
when/where it breaks, and the amount of force you estimate you used for a
periodical/prolonged length of time. After that... we want to know your
thoughts on precision... although we are pretty sure we know already being
sim fanatics ourselves." After all that is finished... I am personally the
last person to give the controllers the once over... and trust me... I'm a
neurotically picky buggar as my reviews of the past may have shown. If I
find something wrong with it... it gets fixed (i.e.... expect longer cords
than you probably need, clamping that can incorporate keyboard trays, a
profile that doesn't block the view to the lower portion of the monitor,
pedal travel that is intuitive and smooth, no notchiness in the wheel
mechanical or resolution wise [obviously], etc.). This wheel will be given
the 100 times over by Simulation freaks and fanatics and will not go to
market until it gets a 100% mark. Please keep in mind that I am building
this wheel for myself... not you <jk>.

We will treat EVERY review after release as a beta test, and if there is for
some unknown reason a fault that slipped through the intricate web of
approval... we will fix it immediately (in mid manufacturing if we must...)
and explore possibilities to have the faulty merchandise brought up to par
on the newer version. Take that to the bank... save this message and hold me
to it (although you won't have to... I'll do that myself), and see what
servicing is REALLY about (should it require it for some unknown reason as I
said).

Hope that explains my mandate on quality control for PDPI.

Cheers,

Shumi

> >It's not a card..... We are going to make joysticks, wheels, etc. We will
do
> >the whole unit... do it the way you guys want it... and do it better than
> >the rest. Simple.

> >You should start to see our products arrive in the beginning of Q2 2000.

> <snip>

> What about longevity. I've heard that the PDPI doesn't support digital
> at the moment and I'm hoping that digital controllers will be more
> longer lasting than the current crop of ones that use pots. Will your
> new controllers be digital and, if not, what are the comparisons between
> digital and non-digital controllers longevity-wise?
> --
> Peter Ives - (AKA Ivington)

> No person's opinions can be said to be
> more correct than another's, because each is
> the sole judge of his or her own experience.

by **Shum** » Sat, 08 Jan 2000 04:00:00

For the record.... Andy at ECCI said "Finally... someone came out with a USB
interface worthy of my wheel... I shoulda known it would've been from you
guys.... how do we get it in?"

If Andy likes it... you know it's going to be hot. He's MORE picky than I am
:)

Cheers,

Shumi

> Good news.

> BTW, I didn't say it was imprecise, I just said I'd love higher resolution
> (i.e., even higher resolution).

> THM

> > Talking to ECCI about a "PDPI Kit" that you will be able to buy
> exclusively
> > for the ECCI wheels. We are also talking to TSW about producing the same
> > kits. Basically, you remove the SG innards, and replace it with USB
> innards.
> > Sounds complicated.... but it's really not if you've every cracked
either
> of
> > the two wheels open.

> > Nothing firm yet.... but we are in discussions.

> > As for a "higher resolution L4"... we are also considering this, and the
> new
> > design would be in a PCI configuration if we decided to move forward on
> it.
> > I'm not going to give out numbers... but it would be the equivalent to
our
> > USB resolutions. I'll keep you posted on it.... but be aware that this
> > project would have to take a back seat to others we are currently
involved
> > in.

> > Cheers,

> > Shumi

> > P.S. 256 positioning resolution accounts for every degree of turn when
> using
> > the L4. Furthermore... you have a patented filtering system to remove
the
> > jitter (we will use the same in USB configs.), and we also incorporate
> what
> > we call "hysteresis". This hysteresis theoretically gives you a 512
> > positioning resolution since it can differentiate down to half of a
> > positioning resolution unit. Meaning... you have 256 resolution... but
it
> > doesn't move over to the unit beside it until it has sensed a wheel
travel
> > of .5 degrees. In fact this is what makes us so precise. Other wheels
> > (particularly USB) move to the next available unit (sometimes 6-10 steps
> > over), as soon as the wheel is moved even slightly beyond the unit.
> Meaning
> > you get "overshoots" in the positioning (which many have experienced on
> this
> > NG). We don't get that because of our hysteresis. So in ending... I'm
not
> > sure why you think it's imprecise... it's the best you can buy in this
day
> > and age, and I'll pay $100.00 US to anyone who can show me something
that
> > does better currently or past.

> > > Ok Shumi, controllers, etc. are in the works, but is a newer higher
> > > resolution version of the L4, USB or otherwise, in the works? My ECCI
> is
> > > connected to an L4, and would love higher resolution.

> > > THM

> > > > Thank you..... you have just completely backed up what I have been
> > saying
> > > > all along. The current implementations of USB in controllers today
are
> > > > GARBAGE. They apparently have NO idea what they are doing, and why
> > should
> > > > they.... they have been designing game controllers for the standard
> > > gameport
> > > > in basic analog configurations, and left the interfacing
> > responsibilities
> > > to
> > > > the sound card companies and the gamecard companies.

> > > > You'll actually find that most USB controllers out there are using
> > > "default
> > > > USB" algorithms that are supplied by the chip manufacturers (some
> decide
> > > to
> > > > get creative and do some minor tweaks such as cutting into the
> > positioning
> > > > resolution to stabilize the jitter). Then we get into FF USB and we
> find
> > > out
> > > > that all are using the Immersion Chip.... the only thing is....
> > Immersion
> > > > WILL NOT allow the algorithms to be altered. They will not even
> release
> > it
> > > > to you in code format. So all FF controllers are stuck with
> Immersion's
> > > > algorithm that is specialized towards FF and NOT positioning.

> > > > We (PDPI) are taking a COMPLETELY different approach and have the
> > > advantage
> > > > of being a "interface company" before we become a controller
company.
> We
> > > are
> > > > fully aware of the intricacies of USB design (since it's our field)
> and
> > > have
> > > > made extraordinary advancements in the ways of proprietary
algorithms
> > that
> > > > incorporate all of the features that made the L4 such a great
> interface.
> > > The
> > > > other guys are quite a ways back from us.... and that's because we
> have
> > > been
> > > > engaged in interface R/D exclusively since 1993. Frankly.... we are
> > years
> > > > ahead and the other guys told/know it.

> > > > We are confident that you will be extremely impressed with our
> > > > implementations. ECCI and TSW are scratching at the door to license
it
> > and
> > > > have been hesitant to enter into USB because of the brutal
> > implementations
> > > > to date. They saw our, and had to have it.

> > > > I'm not going to go into the intricacies of the technology on
here...
> > the
> > > > competition will have to wait for our arrival in the marketplace
> before
> > > they
> > > > see what we have done to leave them in the dust.

> > > > Cheers,

> > > > Shumi

> > > > > i don't get the observations you guys seem to have, since i have
> found
> > > the
> > > > > opposite to be true about this subject ,

> > > > > going from a standard game port to an accelerated port was one of
> the
> > > > > biggest improvements ever i have made in my *** system, the
CPU
> > > usage
> > > > > went to nill, and the response and presicion are impecable .
> > > > > i tried a usb wheel and found it to stop play and use more CPU and
> get
> > > > > confused , get lost, and basically suck compared to a controller
on
> > the
> > > > > accelerated game port.
> > > > > i never have to calibrate my wheel , i don't get any hesitation,
and
> > my
> > > > > controller in no way slows down game play, which is completely
> unlike
> > > what
> > > > i
> > > > > experienced when using a usb controller

> > > > > i think the fad of usb is a joke for game controllers,
> > > > > we have a dedicated port on the system for controllers,(joystick
> port)
> > > and
> > > > > mine is far superior to a "Universal" port of USB, which has to
be
> > > > > interpalated into DX game controllers in software somehow,

> > > > > anyway i have the opposite opinion about this USB crap, I hate
it
> > for
> > > my
> > > > > controllers ,
> > > > > it may be alright for cameras and scanners, but not for wheels,

by **Christer Andersso** » Sun, 09 Jan 2000 04:00:00

No, it's not a problem in GPL, I've won an F3 online league with it :o), and
I'm currently top three in both an F2 online league and an F3 online
league...

/Chrille, but if I had to find something to improve on the PDPI card, it
would be resolution...

by **Christer Andersso** » Sun, 09 Jan 2000 04:00:00

My eyes started to water :o)))

/Chrille

> We have increased the positioning resolution "exponentially" over the L4
> (which still kicks ass over current USB implementations). How does
"accuracy
> to within 1/5th of a degree of turn on a 230 radius" sound to you?

> Cheers,

> Shumi

> > Exciting stuff :o). Can I make a wish??? Okay, I'll do it anyway. I'm
very
> > pleased with my current PDPI card and just love the fact that I never
have
> > to recalibrate. I can only think of one improvement, the resolution, so
I
> > hope the USB card has a higher resolution. Has it, has it :o)?

> > /Chrille, have two puters, so of course I have two PDPI cards ;o)

> > > As a the newly appointed "Director of Marketing & Business
Development"
> at
> > > PDPI, I have first hand knowledge of this subject since I have looked
> into
> > > it quite deeply.

> > > There are a number of factors that caused the popularity of the PDPI
L4
> to
> > > not reach it's full potential.

> > > First we have to look at the timing of the card's entry into the
> > > marketplace. It was launched in 1998 during a global decline in
gamecard
> > > sales. The most obvious factor governing this decline was the
> introduction
> > > of USB and it's now full support by the operating system (Win 98).
This
> > > caused a lot of controller manufacturers to simply look at the USB
port
> as
> > > the means of connection since Microsoft did a good job marketing it
> > > (although it has a lot of advantages as a whole, and can be much more
in
> > > performance should it be implemented correctly).

> > > The popularity of FF has also been a factor. The PDPI L4 only supports
> > > "analog" controllers, and FF controllers typically send their signals
in
> a
> > > native digital format that the L4 does not comprehend coming in. In
fact
> > > most FF controller manufacturers use the USB port (MSFF being the last
> to
> > > make the change over).

> > > Then we have the ugly factor that has been the main reason for my
> > > appointment. Quite frankly.... there are too many people who do not
> > > understand what the Standard Gameport does to your system. It taxes it
> > > through the nose (regardless of CPU power), and is extremely
susceptible
> > to
> > > jitter. They simply don't realize that it was invent and remained
> > unchanged
> > > since 1981! USB has changed a lot of the taxation issues but not
> > effectively
> > > solved the more important jitter issue. So in the end it is public
> > ignorance
> > > (in a kind meaning of the word) that has doomed the achievement of
> > potential
> > > sales/popularity for the L4.

> > > Another important factor is the admitted overall lack of marketing of
> the
> > > product. PDPI is a very small company who happen to currently
specialize
> > in
> > > interface technologies. However, we do not possess some of the
> "marketing
> > > funds" these game controller companies and soundcard companies do. As
> the
> > > guy who now decides where the currently limited marketing dough goes,
I
> > can
> > > tell you that we will not be focusing on the L4 in terms of marketing.
> We
> > > have bigger things in the works and the game controller industry will
> > never
> > > be the same after we initiate our plans.

> > > The past 7 months of my tenure has been to find an investor who can
> > realize
> > > our potential. I finally found it and we are in the process of closing
> the
> > > deal (should be done by mid-January). This will make PDPI a fully
> > > operational game controller manufacturer with the ability to
> mass-produce
> > > (which is the key to lower per-unit costs to the end-user).

> > > This means we will inititate our USB interface that we have completed
> R&D
> > > on. We have done for USB what we did for the gameport. We have carried
> > over
> > > ALL of the functions of the L4 that still makes it superior to USB in
> it's
> > > currently found configurations, and adapted it to USB. Meaning... we
can
> > > tackle the Jitter issue the exact same way we did on the L4.
Meaning...
> we
> > > can remove the jitter, which means we do not have to cut into the
> > > positioning resolution to combat it. We can read a "full positioning
> > > resolution spectrum" without having to worry about Jitter. Which means
> we
> > > already have an advantage over other configurations in regards to
> > precision
> > > and performance.

> > > Then we factor in the mandate that I am currently exercising. We are
> > > listening to YOU, designing for YOU, and have been paying very close
> > > attention to NGs like this one (among others) for answers to our
design
> > > questions... the end result should be a controller for each genre that
> is
> > > custom designed to meet the enthusiasts and leisure users alike. With
an
> > > affordable price tag to boot. We know what's wrong with the other
> > > wheels/sticks... and will make sure we avoid the same mistakes whilst
> > adding
> > > a few of our own bonuses to boot.

> > > We will be on store shelves, and available around the world in such
> retail
> > > outlets. The products will be accessible, and the company will be
doing
> > it's
> > > best to give back to the Sim Communities in mainy forms (other than
just
> > > making a good controller...).

> > > Rest assured Karl..... you will be hearing LOTS about us very soon :)

> > > Cheers,

> > > Shumi
> > > PDPI

> > > > It seems that this gamecard has been out for over a year, and it is
a
> > > > MASSIVE improvement for sim racing. (read all the reviews).
> > > > Its pretty cheap now, so why do people stick to the jitter and
> slowness
> > of
> > > > the traditional gameports ?

> > > > I always found games like INDYCAR 2 and some other racesims
virtually
> > > > undrivable on streetcircuits because the lack of precision with my
T2
> > > wheel
> > > > (even with new pots and mega-hardware). GP2 was the only game that
> > really
> > > > responded fast to gameport input.

> > > > U guys raceing ICR2 for years: just tell me how you did it?
> > > > I raced NASCAR 2 and INDYCAR2 on the ovals a lot, but street
circuits
> > and
> > > > even road circuits were unrealistically hard because of slow
gameport
> > > input.
> > > > (don't give me this 'racecars are hard to control nonsense' .. I
> know!)
> > > > Even at slow speeds the cars react VERY slow..

> > > > Still there have been racing leagues out there for ICR2 all this
> > time....
> > > > Amasing.

by **Joe Murph** » Wed, 12 Jan 2000 04:00:00

Is it better to run GPL with or without ff.I have a sidewinder
ff&pedals.Will your new wheel be ff.

by **Shum** » Mon, 17 Jan 2000 04:00:00

Well Joe.... that is a very subjective question. Some like FF... some don't.
I'll let the individual preferences prevail in this debate.

We WILL have a FF wheel, and will be exploring whether we will make 2
versions (FF & Non-FF), or whether we will make one with the ability to turn
off the FF effects upon choice. We have to make an engineering miracle to
ensure that notchiness is not prevalent in the FF wheel without FF turned
on... and will have a better idea of our intentions as we accept/decline
design ideas.

I can keep you posted on this as development continues.

Cheers,
Shumi