I have just ordered an E6804 and read the manual in anticipation of it's arrival. The more I look at it the more impressed I am with what the 6804 can do and am left wondering why the 682 has such a broad audience. I understand that the additional outputs meet some very specific design needs; if for instance you are running many varieties of pixel standards. I can also see that the dual voltage is nice, again for those with very specific needs. But, unless I'm mistaken, with the E6804 you can run the controller in 12v, have a couple of 12v strings attached to a couple of ports and then have another port setup to drive a 5V string and just use the data (and clock, if req) from the board and have the power bypass the controller and go straight from the power supply to the string. Is this not the case? I know I'd miss the benefit of the on-board fuses, but inline fuses are cheap. Both units can handle 12 universes of pixels. It seems to me that, unless you are running more than 4 different types of output there is no need or the 682. Am I missing something? If I were using it as a pixel controller AND as a e1.31-DMX bridge then perhaps the extra outputs would be particularly helpful, since each DMX-out would be driving so many fewer pixels than what it's capable of (ideally distributing 510 pixels to each output of the 6804 instead of the 170 for each DMX output) so spreading that load over more outputs would be nice. But for the price difference why not just get 2 6804s? Unless 8 ports just isn't enough and you really need 12. For now I'm running all 1 type of strip, considering adding some strings (all of the same type) and perhaps dedicating a port to DMX to drive a TinyPix with some floods and maybe a star. All told less than a thousand pixels. So, is there some advantage to the E682 I'm missing?