I'm with Carl on this one. The open architecture of DCC allows for different wireless protocols to interface with it. That's a good thing because it doesn't stifle innovation.
At the same time, the JMRI wireless apps for iDevices and Android ones co-exist quite well. They're all but seamless. I set up WiThrottle on my JMRI install and there was no problem accommodating Android devices. It all just worked (at least that part, there's often something fiddly with JMRI that needs massaged the right way to properly implement it, but it applies equally to both devices if there is such a hiccup.)
Unless someone comes up with a third mobile device OS, that covers the vast majority of wirelss devices commonly encountered. Should this be a standard? Not sure, as there's the possibility of evolutionary change in those OS making WiThrottle obsolete. I'd imagine that the next OS would then inspire another interfacing program similar to WiThrottle to replace it.
But DCC would still work for that.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
In theory at least, such a standard already exists. Anybody can write an application for a wifi device to control a JMRI throttle. Today applications exist for the iPhone and Android devices. There is nothing preventing anybody that thinks there is a market for it from producing a dedicated device with real buttons and knobs using this standard interface.
I have the right to remain silent. By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.
DCC describes an interface for communicating with and controlling locomotives
The NMRA is proposing a similar standard, Layout Command Control (LCC), to control more than just locomotives. Like any communications protocol, this would allow devices from different venders to work with one another.
But neither of these addresses the interface to the human operator. Should there be a standard or adopt an existing (wireless/IP) communications protocol (the IP msg set) between the handheld device (e.g. smartphone, new NCE/Digitrax wireless controller) and DCC/LCC command stations?
the benefits would be to allow handhelds from different venders and non-modeler suppliers (e.g. smartphones) to operate with one another and have common capabilities.
It would allow a variety of human interfaces better suited for various operator preferences. Imagine using an NCE handheld (or one of several) with a Digitrax system because you prefer the NCE graphical user interface (GUI) but like the price/features of the Digitrax command station.
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading