I was on MRC's website for the first time in awhile just seeing what new products they had. I noticed that they now make a Computer Interface it says sold out on the site but I'm assuming it's not released yet since I could find minimal information on it. Does anyone have any information on this accessory they are making? Will it work for any of the MRC DCC systems (I Own a Prodigy Express) and I'm also curious if it will work with JMRI software.
You'd think something would of been made sooner too interface MRC with a computer since they do use ethernet cords to connect the throttle to the system.
conrail92You'd think something would of been made sooner too interface MRC with a computer since they do use ethernet cords to connect the throttle to the system.
just because they use a commonly available cable to make the connection between their components doesn't mean that the signals and voltages they use are compatible . unless you can afford to loose either or both the MRC system and the computer , i wouldn't recommend connecting them with an ethernet cable
also note that many systems use or have used telephone style cables to connect their components , that doesn't mean you can phone home with them !
ernie
The back cover of the November Model Railroader gives a brief description of what their wireless interface will do. The prices shown on their website have been lowered from what they had previously listed. These are MSRP so I assume street prices will be much lower.
Jerry
Rio Grande vs. Santa Fe.....the battle is over but the glory remains!
If it's not going to work with JMRI and popular commercial programs like RR&Co then they might as well not even bother. I REALLY hope that 'proprietary software' in the ad ont eh back of MR is a typo. All other major DCC brands have a computer interface that works with lots of ssoftware, not just what they themselves might provide.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
conrail92 and I'm also curious if it will work with JMRI software.
and I'm also curious if it will work with JMRI software.
I just checked the JMRI Yahoo group (You can do that too, the messages are open to the public - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jmriusers/) and after wading through a LOT of MRC decoder problems, I found a post on the subject dating back to December 2007. It a nutshell, the developers of JMRI were getting mixed information from MRC about whether they would share the information necessary to allow JMRI to communicate with their system. Somehow, then, it doesn't surprise me that MRC still does not appear on JMRI's list of supported hardware: http://jmri.sourceforge.net/help/en/html/hardware/index.shtml
conrail92 You'd think something would of been made sooner too interface MRC with a computer since they do use ethernet cords to connect the throttle to the system.
The physical type of cable being used is way down on the list of things that need to be resolved before one device can communicate with another.
Steve
Ok, thanks for the information!
I spoke with Bob Jacobsen (the head of the JMRI project) in Anaheim and he told me MRC declined their requests to add MRC to JMRI.
Bob said he was very disappointed that MRC has elected to go completely proprietary and not join the open JMRI effort.
I too am quite disappointed in MRC taking this stance.
Joe Fugate Modeling the 1980s SP Siskiyou Line in southern Oregon
Wow....just wow. VERY shortsighted on their part.
I would love to hear an MRC rep come on here and explain their reasoning. But, like many politicians, I don't think they would be able to tell the truth, which most likely is that they feel that their chosen course will yield more profit.
MRC systems tend to appeal to first time users because of price and ease of use, and because of their advertising approach. For many of us, we didn't even realize how important a computer interface would be would be when we first started, then later became aware of the benefit. If they get enough people to buy their DCC systems, then the majority of them will probably have little choice but to buy the expensive MRC interface once they feel the need for it.
I think that they are wrong, but then I'm sure they are smarter than I am when it comes to making money. But making money this way is not very appealing to most of us modelers.
I would like to follow-up my previous post by saying that, in some ways, I really like MRC. I have their wireless system, which has a lot of nice features. I also have two of their decoders that work really well. I admire them for offering decoder solutions for many locos that would othewise be difficult to fit. It's just too bad that so many have had problems with their decoders. Let's hope that their newer versions are getting better.
I still have their wireless DCC system and use it occasionally but have found another system that better fits my method of operation. I can switch back and forth between the two. I have kept the MRC Wireless with the thought that their computer interface might be really great. But it sounds like it won't be anything l like JMRI so that hope has dimmed. I'll probably sell it one of these days, not because it's not a very fine system in its own right, but because another system actually works better for me, and because of the dissapointing interface.
davidmbedard What is the 'other' system you keep talking about? David B
What is the 'other' system you keep talking about?
David B
Digitrax Zephyr/DT400
CSX Robert Another feature users wanted was the ability to use the interface on older Windows 98 machines because a lot of people have an older machine they can use in their layout room. Well, the interface will only work with Windows XP and later and MRC's response is "since it is wireless you really do not need a computer in the train room."
I was wondering where you got this information because MRC Tech Support has advised me that their interface will work with Windows 98 and above.
jwils1CSX Robert Another feature users wanted was the ability to use the interface on older Windows 98 machines because a lot of people have an older machine they can use in their layout room. Well, the interface will only work with Windows XP and later and MRC's response is "since it is wireless you really do not need a computer in the train room." I was wondering where you got this information because MRC Tech Support has advised me that their interface will work with Windows 98 and above.
Just a guess, but it probably depends on which version of W98.
MS took a long time to get their USB ducks in a row, and I've heard that W98 SE (Second Edition) will support some USB devices that the "regular" (first edition) W98 won't.
But again, that's just a guess.
JMRI or forget it. One little interface costing a few dozen dollars talks to both my Digitrax Chief and all of my QSI engines directly from the computer.
MRC as usual is only painting themselves into a corner with no opening. If they dont want to share with JMRI, then they dont need to expect sales of thier wonderful bricks.
In fact more and more FREE open source software is taking the place of Microshaft on the computers (Plural) here at the house.
The thing that makes me upset is MRC likes to print these ads and there will ALWAYS be a doofus somewhere in the world awestriken by the glory and the possibilities enough to unload a wad of dollars at least once.
Some people on the MRC-DCC yahoo group commented that they would like for the interface to work with older Windows operating systems or even Linux because they had older computers that they could use in their train room. There is an MRC tech who was particiaptes in that group, and his response was
it is suppose to work with the newer windows based operating systems, [XP and above]since it is wireless you really do not need a computer in the train room
If you go to the group and search the messages for "prodigy wireless computer interface win98" it will bring up some of the messages refering to this topic. The above quote is from a year ago(to the day, actually) so it is possible that that has changed, but I would not count on it.
I was told today that it is supposed to work with Windows 98 and above so this should be up-to-date info. I guess we'll just wait and see.
You can easily replace the Win98 SE with a XP and run it well without USB worries. Any number of used computers are showing up on the market with XP ready to go. It's not good to struggle with dead dinosaur operating systems on machines so old that they need hardware upgrades to work with today's advances in train control.
The good news is computer prices fall each year and laptops are getting cheap enough to be a baker's dozen as the Society migrates Everyone towards celluar based internet and wireless. I was told recently that my voice only cell phone was obselete and I needed to get the newer version with data, text, internet, camera.... I replied [censored] and kept going with my old cell LOL.
davidmbedard Does windows 98 support USB 2.0? David B
Does windows 98 support USB 2.0?
nope. But USB2.0 devices usually are backward compatible and can run at USB1.0 speed, which is more than fast enough for DCC use. Also keep in mind that the initial release of even WIndows XP did not support USB2.0 - there was a patch for that. It hasn;t been an issue since the media had SP1 slipstreamed in a way back when, but a fresh install of XP with an original XP CD with no service packs won't do USB2.0.
Oh, and the above is correct, Win98 does NOT support USB, Win98SE does. A 'capable' Win98 computer probably can run XP, but unless you can get it up to 512MB RAM it's going to be painfully slow. A slightly newer 'old' system would be a much better choice if you are looking for a secondhand computer for the railroad. My old old system from 8-10 years ago ran XP reasonably well - in fact a friend is using it to this day - but in the secondhand market you can surely find one only 5-6 years old which will be far more capable. But don't pay much for such an old computer - pay attention to the Dell deals and you can get a whole new system for $300. Most of the time these $300 specials are seriously lacking, usually in RAM - but that's cheap to add. But once in a while the $300 special really is a deal and you get quite worthwhile computer for that - 2GB RAM, 320-500GB hard disk. PLENTY for most people. The missing element is the super high power video card for the latest games. If you're goign to surf, read email, and use JMRI you don't need a super duper video card - and the REALLY good ones of those cost more than the entire rest of the computer.
Win XP is usually issued as Service Pack Two or Three this year. All other previous versions like original and SP1 are in need of upgrading.
You dont need much computer to run JMRI, I assume (Right, here we go) that a old Pentium II chip running 400 or faster clock speed with at least 512 of any old ram will run the program very well.
My JMRI has the rail cirkits interface with USB. Somewhere in the device is a optical connection isolating the computer physically from the track and locomotive. I do have a machine powerful enough to run the latest games and would not want all that wattage to get to the HO scale stuff at all. That is one reason why I passed up the older interface with the serial port.
I could probably build a basic desktop for a few hundred dollars complete, the monitor will be extra. Not much more than the cost of a HO scale locomotive these days.
laptops are selling for around 400 dollars and they are plenty powerful enough to run JMRI very well.
I think the next step will be a interface capable of talking to and listening to data to and from Digitrax DCC via the radio in the train room. No USB needed, just a antenna.
No, you don't need much to run JMRI. On a slower computer I suspect it would run better under Linux but I haven't tested this (I've laode dit under Linux but not on a slow computer). I did for a while have a P3-700 laptop with 384MB RAM running XP and JMRI would run fine on it, but the initial load time was horrendous (Java is a pig). Once it was loaded it performed just fine, no issues at all.
rrinker Oh, and the above is correct, Win98 does NOT support USB, Win98SE does. --Randy
Oh, and the above is correct, Win98 does NOT support USB, Win98SE does.
We're getting off-topic here, but yes, W98 does support USB to a certain extent. In fact, even the later service releases of W95 had rudimentary USB support. I know this to be true because "back in the day" I used a USB Webcam on W95 OSR2.1.
See this KB article that compares W95 and W98 USB support:
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/archive/usbwin98.mspx
The deciding factor is whether or not the USB device's drivers were written to "make up" for Microsoft's immature USB support in the earlier Windows releases.
SPROG II
A DCC system and programmer in one little box.
jwils1 I would love to hear an MRC rep come on here and explain their reasoning. But, like many politicians, I don't think they would be able to tell the truth, which most likely is that they feel that their chosen course will yield more profit. MRC systems tend to appeal to first time users because of price and ease of use, and because of their advertising approach. For many of us, we didn't even realize how important a computer interface would be would be when we first started, then later became aware of the benefit. If they get enough people to buy their DCC systems, then the majority of them will probably have little choice but to buy the expensive MRC interface once they feel the need for it. I think that they are wrong, but then I'm sure they are smarter than I am when it comes to making money. But making money this way is not very appealing to most of us modelers.
Would any of you guys accept an invite to a party where the rest of the guests are waiting in the wings to beat you up?
If their computer interface is strictly for their line of dcc systems, users of Digi-Trax, NCE, Lenz, Bachman, and other brands of dcc systems should not even voice an opinion on this topic. Let the MRC dcc system users evaluate the product when it finally arrives.
it is amazing to me how these forums generate such negativity and bias towards one manufacturer...
it reminds me of the "Abbott and Costello" skit about the Susquehana Hat Company on Bagle Street...every one hated the hat company because they were either injured or killed while wearing a Susquehana Hat....
was anybody here wearing an MRC product on their head when a safe fell on them from a second story window?
i see alot of people here say "MRC this" and "MRC that", but can somebody here give a straight answer on why they dislike MRC or does anybody here have a legitimate gripe against them.
i have used plenty of MRC products in the past from powerpacks to dcc decoders and never once had a bad customer service issue, or thought that reading their advertisments makes them bad people. I can't even complain about other companies customer service or products because i never suffered from post traumatic stress over a bad model railroad product.
And you know what...alot of products on the market can fail from stoves, cars, VCR's, other appliances, and other manufacturers hobby products, but yet i fail to see anybody complaining or ranting about anything else, just the Susquehana Hat Company
It was always my belief that Model Railroaders were a bunch of great guys that got together to work on an enjoyable hobby, but i see the internet has created a fanatical group of people, who chase people that they deem to be monsters, with torches and pitchforks and then burn them at the stake...sounds like the Salem, Mass. witch hunts all over again.
what's really amazing to me is that a supposedly stand up organization as Kalmbach Publishing/Model Railroader Magazine allows this negativity and bias continue on and on, almost as if they enjoy sitting back and watching this mushroom into a good fight. My subscription dollars may be better spent somewhere else.
Hey Grumpy,
I don't think you would find anyone on this list that would say anything negative about MRC DC power-packs. They have been, and likely always will be regarded as some of the best on the market.
You will however find many people that have had terrible trouble with MRC decoders, both sound and non-sound. Both after-market decoders and the ones supplied to Athearn have proven to be very unreliable for many modellers.
In addition to the very poor reputation of the decoders, MRC has had a number of false starts in DCC. I believe that the current Prodigy line is their 3rd attempt to market a system. Prior systems are not compatible with the current line and are obsolete, thus leaving the purchasers of these systems high and dry.
Only now, is MRC rounding out its DCC product line to provide the features that others have had for years. Now I for one am quite prepared to believe that the current MRC DCC system is actually quite well designed, easy to use and offers decent value. However, what you see expressed here demonstrates just how much damage MRC did to its reputation with their poorly thought out efforts in DCC.
It take years to build a companies reputation, and a remarkably short time to destroy it. The fact is, that having damaged the MRC name so badly in DCC circles, simply placing advertising that states that they are leading the DCC market, does not rehabilitate the MRC name. If anything it does further damage as so many consumers have the exact oposite opinion.
I think it will take quite a long time for MRC to regain trust in the DCC market.
Simon Modelling CB&Q and Wabash See my slowly evolving layout on my picturetrail site http://www.picturetrail.com/simontrains and our videos at http://www.youtube.com/user/MrCrispybake?feature=mhum
grumpy old trainguy,Wow, your 6th post, and you're slamming everyone here. I'm suprised you were able to wait so long. I mean, it must be almost 24 whole hours since you registered here. Most people take a little longer to form a negative opinion, threaten economic sanctions against Kalmbach, and propose censorship of the forum based on what products one owns. Congratulations!
In the event you are serious, allow me to tell you about the "joys" of MRC DCC sound decoders.
I am the Operations Chairman and "DCC guru" at my large (10,000 sq. ft.), old (est. 1938) railroad club (www.ssmrc.org). We have about 60+ members, and when we started a new layout in 1998, we went with Digitrax DCC. All locos used in Operations or that are left on the layout overnight must be registered. Our registration is currently just over 750 locos. We have monthly decoder clinics where we help each other install decoders and program them.
IOW, I've witnessed a lot of DCC installs and programming (literally, hundreds).
I can say with authority that nothing gives us more problems than MRC sound decoders. Nothing!
For example, one member bought 4 SD45's with MRC sound. We were able to program one of them. He also bought some F-units, and we weren't able to program any of them. He sold them all, eventually.
Several other members have installed the Atlas S-unit MRC sound board. I think that's up to 10 locos, now. Six of them failed, either to program or while running and were all sent back to MRC for repair.
When the Athearn Challengers were new, one member went through three of them, and we couldn't get any of them to program.
Another member has an Athearn Big Boy with MRC sound. While it does run, it also loses it's address occasionally and it's a pain to get it back to rights.
A few other members have bought the small Roundhouse steamers. I'd say we have about a 50% failure rate, there, too. They run, but they won't program.
Then there's the MP15's with MRC sound. A member bought one, and it had built-in momentum so bad that it took 10 seconds to start to move, and just as long to stop. This behavior could not be changed. After the first crash where it went through a bumper post onto the mainline, the loco was returned.
Did you know that it's impossible to read an MRC decoder? Did you know that when you program an MRC loco to a new address, it doesn't work anymore because it's some random DCC address? You can't program it back, because the address is something you can't read. It's a flaming pain in the butt.
Oh, and my favorite part? If you are running a multi-unit lash up, and there's a track short for some reason, all your MRC sound locos stop working! Yep, they cease to operate until you can turn them back on. Which means that you have to manually select each one, wake it up, then go to the next one. This is highly annoying.
As a rule of thumb, we tell members of our club not to buy MRC DCC anything. The member of our club that owns a hobby shop refuses to stock them since they are such dogs. He'll order them for you, but only after warning you about what you're getting.
But the best one of all is when the MRC factory rep. lied to my face. Back in January, the MRC Atlas switcher sound decoder was just out but I hadn't heard it yet. Rumors were swirling on the Atlas Forum that they used the wrong sound effect. Alco S-units used 539 prime movers, a 6-cylinder diesel with dinner plate-sized pistons (yes, I've actually stuck my head into a 539 engine block). What MRC had done was use an Alco 244 RS-3 prime mover as it's diesel sound. A 244 is a V-12 (RS-type) or V-16 (PA-type) with smaller cylinders.
I was at the Springfield (MA) show in January, and MRC was there with their factory booth. I went up to the rep. at the table, and introduced myself, then asked him about the Atlas S-unit sound board. He had a demo set up and running (but due to the cavernous room and the near-by MTH booth, one could barely hear it). I told him I had heard a rumor on the internet that the MRC board was a 244 instead of a 539. He denied it. "Oh, no, we record all our own sound effects. If that's what the switcher had, then that's what we put into it." And then he went on about how MRC did things right, like recording each notch seperately instead of pitch bending it like other manufacturers do, blah, blah, blah.
Of course, when you play the MRC board, it sounds like an RS-3, not an S-2. And just this summer, one of their advertisements on the back of MR (the one with a NH FL9), it actually lists the Alco S-unit sound board as having an Alco 244 prime mover. Oops!
As for your Abbot and Costello routine, the difference here isn't that bad things just happen to locos that have MRC sound boards in them, it's that the MRC boards cause the failure at a much higher rate than any other brand. Using your hat analogy, what if over half the hats made by the Susquehana Hat Company on Bagle Street tore in half when you first put it on your head? Or maybe the hat brim fell off when you tugged on it? Would you continue to buy hats from the Susquehana Hat Company on Bagle Street if they continually failed when they were brand new under the most mild use imaginable?
And we're not slamming their DC powerpack line. If anything, I continue to be impressed by their ruggedness after decades of use. This only makes their DCC ineptitude even more perplexing.
As for stress, you haven't lived until you tell a new member fresh to the hobby that the loco that he just spent $240 on won't work because it won't take a DCC address. And even tho' your the DCC guru, you can't fix it. They look at you with their puppy dog eyes and ask you why? You have to tell them because MRC is J-U-N-K, and that it's going to have to be returned to MRC for a fix because there's nothing that can be done by you. That just sucks the life out of the party, know what I mean?
BTW, as for folks not complaining about anything else, only MRC? Did you not see davidmbedard complaining about Tsunamis in the other thread? If anything model railroaders love to complain.
And spare me the "it's because of the internet" Salem witch trials act. Go back and read some old MR's from back in the day. My club has an almost complete collection. There were a lot of compaints about plastic vs. metal/wood, kits vs scratchbuilding, 6vdc vs. 12vdc, tinplate vs. scale, etc. Complaining has been the lifeblood of model railroading since Joshua Lionel Cowen was a little boy. It's not a recent development in the human condition. What's that Billy Joel line? "The good old days weren't always good..."
Paul A. Cutler III*******************Weather Or No Go New Haven*******************
i know i'm a newbie poster here, i wasn't trying to slam any one person in particular, but look at it as if you were new to this forum and saw the negativity and hate.
you would take a step back and go "Whoaa!!!!", there's enough hate and predjudice in the real 1:1 world that we have to deal with on a daily basis, are we really going to let it seep into the hobby that we enjoy and the hobby that is supposed to make us forget about what goes on the real world....Maybe that's why i'm Grumpy
grumpy old trainguy i know i'm a newbie poster here, i wasn't trying to slam any one person in particular, but look at it as if you were new to this forum and saw the negativity and hate. you would take a step back and go "Whoaa!!!!", there's enough hate and predjudice in the real 1:1 world that we have to deal with on a daily basis, are we really going to let it seep into the hobby that we enjoy and the hobby that is supposed to make us forget about what goes on the real world....Maybe that's why i'm Grumpy
My guess is
A) You work for MRC
or
B) You failed to take your medication today.
Lets see your layout pics and move on to somthing else.
grumpy old trainguyWould any of you guys accept an invite to a party where the rest of the guests are waiting in the wings to beat you up?
If I thought I had a chance to reverse negative opinion of my company and it's products, and potentially increase market share in what could be dwindling market as people loose disposable income, than absolutely. But as has been noted, not all companies are run well, now are they?
Cheers!
I'm trying to model 1956, not live in it.
No hate here. Just 600 dollars gone and three MRC equiptted engines into the trashcan. THAT is the voice of experience. Not hate.
Money can be replaced, really bad products wont be replaced.