TP3244 Controller Series - Alive or Dead?

[dmoore]

First I'd like to say that I think the TP3244 controller was an excellent controller (I have 10 or so of them) but as I look ahead at what is coming down the pike from a development standpoint, it appears that the TP3244 or it's rumored successor, will not be making a showing in 2011.

As I plan my display design for 2011 the time nears to finalize on decisions like these and while I'd really like to add some second gen TP3244's for 2011 it would be great to know something really will be coming.

Anyone have any rumors or factual information on this subject?

[David_AVD]

Without word from Phil, I think you'd have to be a pessimist and assume the Tiger range is unavailable until further notice.   

[Danbel]

Without word from Phil, I think you'd have to be a pessimist and assume the Tiger range is unavailable until further notice.


I don't light that new I need about 10 and more  TP3244 controller .Some people have some in arctic let me know I buy some 

[smartalec]

i guess people dont like looking for new gear
http://forums.auschristmaslighting.com/index.php/topic,909.msg7301.html#msg7301
the ECG-PIXAD8 is coming out
its a smarter way than using many tp3244's like people think they have to do

[ɟɐsʇǝppʎ]

Without word from Phil, I think you'd have to be a pessimist and assume the Tiger range is unavailable until further notice.


I don't light that new I need about 10 and more  TP3244 controller .Some people have some in arctic let me know I buy some 

I wouldnt be too worried as there are other options available like the ECG-PIXAD8 controller which should be avalable in a month or so

Refer to this thread for further info on the ECG-PIXAD8 http://forums.auschristmaslighting.com/index.php/topic,909.0.html

Looks like Alec just beat me to it

[Tabor]

I still intend to release new firmware for the current TP3244.

Looks like there will be other, cleaner options this year.

But rest assured the current boards will not be useless.

[dmoore]

I still intend to release new firmware for the current TP3244.

Looks like there will be other, cleaner options this year.

But rest assured the current boards will not be useless.

Is there any possibility that instead of the TP3244 dying on the vine that the hardware details be released to the public so that others could produce the controller?

[David_AVD]

An updated version of the TP3244 could easily be produced that used the existing (and soon to be updated) code from Tabor.

Now, whether this is practical given the other offerings coming out (soon), I don't know.

[Tabor]

I agree with David_AVD.
As to if the hardware design is release, thats up to Phil, its his design I just provided the firmware.

To do the exact same thing as a TP3244 you could use the little PIC board that I have posted elsewhere on the forum.
You would need a RS485 front end (one chip and some caps) but the board itself is more than capable of doing the SPI data for pixels.

I had intended to release code snippets for the various pixel protocols, so anyone could build  a simple pixel controller.
Its really a matter of time, of which I have none.

[dmoore]

I'd like to bump this thread.

While I agree that the ECG-PIXAD8 (along withthe E680) does meet some of the needs for a SPI output device, that is mainly focused around centralized items such as megatrees where you need a fair number of pixel strings coming together in a single location.

What is still missing is a de-centralized solution for items like pixel based minitrees, the new coro canes I'm finishing up and other stand-alone pixel based elements in a display.  I still find that the small physical size, the ability to use a DMX input (including support for HyperDMX), the excellent web interface, the wide variety of pixel support and the low cost (they were $39 as I seem to recall) still make it stand-out in this area.

It would really disappoint me if such a great hardware and software design were to die and not go on to serve any additional value to others.  Is it possible to release the hardware so we can produce it independently?  Could someone else re-design (in the absence of Phil) the board, maybe putting in some of the minor improvements that were discussed in another thread but still make it firmware compatible with the TP3244?

We may not be able to bring back AussiePhil but maybe we can bring back a little of his design!  Save the TP3244!

[TheBanker]

I'm sure your aware of RJ's stuff too, right?  Combiners and 4 port passive hubs that go along with the smart strings?

http://diylightanimation.com/index.php?topic=5245.0

[ѕυρєямαη]

A link would be helpfull...

[dmoore]

I'm sure your aware of RJ's stuff too, right?  Combiners and 4 port passive hubs that go along with the smart strings?

http://diylightanimation.com/index.php?topic=5245.0

I think RJ's stuff is wonderful and it meets the needs for many very well.  The issue is that it's limited in it's scope, now and it would appear, in the future, as it relates to pixel chip support.  While it's much easier to support a one chip solution, that one chip may not be the best option for all.  The other issue is that it is built on a limited support protocol - for example, it's a sure bet that LOR S3 won't support PixelNet but nearly a 100% thing that it will support native DMX (not that I plan to use LOR S3).

The TP3244 was/is a wonderful controller and it just needs a few tweaks to get it perfect based on what we learned last year.  Seems crazy to re-invent the wheel when we have a pretty pimped out wheel already.

[taybrynn]

Maybe its all headed toward bridging protocols and maybe using E1.31 ... and then output the protocols you want, which could include DMX, HyperDMX, Pixelnet, LOR, etc.

[dmoore]

Maybe its all headed toward bridging protocols and maybe using E1.31 ... and then output the protocols you want, which could include DMX, HyperDMX, Pixelnet, LOR, etc.

Yep - that's what my nice little DR4 and ECG8 are for - DMX output (including HyperDMX).  Last year I had the ECG8 inside the house and 6 DMX universe cables going out to the devices in the yard.  I think it's still an unknown as to how well Ethernet will hold up (not over fiber) out in the yard in less than idea situations.