Hi all!

This poll is for those who tested CS2 but neither CS1 nor CS1 reloaded and for those who tested CS1 and/or CS1 reloaded but not CS2.
There is a different poll for those who tested CS2 and (CS1 and/or CS1 reloaded).
This poll is only for those who tested one type of Central Station (either the old one or the new one).

I want to find out if you were satisfied with the type of Central Station you tested (if you tested CS1 and CS1 reloaded please specify if you were satisfied with either of these (click "satisfied" if one of the two was satisfying)).

This poll runs for 31 days, so please vote during January 2011.

I agree with Greg and want to add that if I would not have upgraded the CS of would have the CS2 instead, I would have to get a booster since I need at least 3A to run the layout at some times.
Kind regards, Henk

I had something similar, only I had bought the CS1, used it, and decided it wasn't a well finished product. It was a capable controller, but the user interface just wasn't good.
I kept both the CS1 and my 6021 for a while, and played with the sniffer port and other things on the CS1.

Then Marklin announced the CS2 and I had a see one before buying. So the CS1 went on the market (CS1 reloaded was available) and I bought a CS2. I looked at the CS1 reloaded briefly, but it was still not a well finished product. I suspect this comes from the company philosophy in ESU and the way there designers like a product to be.

It seems to me that they have designed a product to be laid out the way they, as technicians and designers believe it should be, but without considering what will be simple and intuitive for the average user.
The comment of a cheap games console is exactly how my father described the CS1 also, and given his back ground in the electronics and control systems he was in a good position to independent view.

I still have my 6021 and I have bought the connect 6021 for it and used it with the CS2, and I have been very happy with that combination. And I think the CS2 is a good successor to the 6021, where the CS1 was not.

Cheers....

Mike.

Fully agree Mike. Marklin made a mistake in using ESU and customers have not had the back up expected from Marklin. What was in my view worse was when ESU made a similar item to compete with the one they made for Marklin. However the new manufacturer hopefull is better and so far this appears to be the case.

dave

Response number to the poll probably also tell us that most members don't necessarily use any one of the CS as their primary controller.

Either because there are lots of current generation of alternatives (ECoS, Commander, etc)
OR
They feel they are sufficiently satisfied with their previous generation controller (6021, IB, etc)

If you're only running a simple loop or dogbone layout - you may even find that a sophisticated controller of this calibre is not needed.

I think we have to read between the lines in this issue.

In the late 1990s, Marklin-Motorola was a good, well-proven system, but it was fast approaching its obsoleteness simply because it's at the limit of its development with 6090x chip technology.
But DCC was not only fast becoming the industry standard, it is also more modern, vastly more flexible, and expandable compared to MM. Read: possibilities of more functions, better sound quality, continuously improving load control, etc.

Now, for Marklin to create an entirely new system in which to rival DCC is a behemoth task, obviously too much for Marklin to tackle alone at the time.
In any case, IMO I can't think of them finding a better partner to go with than with ESU.

The crux of the issue is the two differing goals from the two partners:

ESU's aim is to sell more decoders and controllers; so it was probably even thinking of bringing MFX to sell as alternative to DCC - for which, its ambition was to become the lead supplier in this new system, which will have its own attractiveness.
Thus, for its part, it was developing MFX in such a way that it can be integrated and/or cross-sell with its existing DCC lineups. In a way, it's also a risk leverage, future proofing their products. If further development of MFX failed to gain traction, it's easier for customers who bought their MFX products to switch to DCC. It's also lessen the risk for existing DCC users to "try out" MFX.
As a result, they had always planned that ECOS and CS1 to be able to both handle DCC and MFX. Look also at the philosophy of multi-protocol Lokpilot M4..

Marklin's aim is more politically motivated. Their aim is to create a system that should be so attractive that it will block any possible encroachment of DCC system into their perceived "territory". Marklin's thinking is that if they can have COMPLETE dominance over the decoder market for the locomotives they that they're selling... wow, they'll be reeling the profit in.
Marklin has no ambition to sell decoders in similar way as ESU did. Why bother if you already have a ready made market (those who are stuck with 3-rail)? The point is to stop them defecting and look DCC as "cool".

Thus Marklin never liked it that the original CS1 was a "marklinized" version of ECoS, for they originally wanted the CS to be the only, unique main controller for MFX... oblivious that 3-rail market is shrinking...
They were also frustrated enough that much of these ESU developed peripherals provides too many back doors for DCC models to be ran on 3-rail; though they now should be grateful that much of the framework that ESU left them make it easier to create CS2 that can speak both protocol.

May I add, it never seemed to occur to Marklin to seriously market any of their CS as a great DCC Controller?

Edited by user 11 February 2011 13:58:27(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Right, Nev...
I think, while ESU approached the development of MFX with a clear business vision,
Marklin was too clouded with their obsession to "control" what their customers buy.

Both obviously resent the other, and the partnership broke apart.

I think Marklin is the ultimate loser here.

Ray,
My thinking was that at the end of the day,
what matters is whose contribution ensured better long term value for MFX customers...
As simple as that.

Technically speaking; MFX was always developed from DCC...
I think it's pretty much a given that designing an operating system from scratch, given their limited resources is a no go (though Marklin most probably try heading down that path).

And thus, the ability to make controllers that can speak both protocols is always there.

Through the partnership with ESU, Marklin was given a golden chance to tap into the top-of-the-range DCC controller market - where it had no product to offer then!
Essentially, what ESU had done here is simply offering Marklin a share of their ECOS DCC market.

Marklin turned down the opportunity. It's their own problem.

.........................................................

Ray. Fully agree. A manufacturer should do just that and not also try to retail an item to compete with the one they make for their customer. Anyway Marklin are happy to be rid of ESU as they dont need them and sales of the CS2 has shown they have a good product.
However I think that the CS2 is now over priced. MFX is nor really of any concern to me and I expect users can take it or leave it but for me the CS2 will need to do more than it does to justify the price tag. I know ESU is popular with some but at the end of the day they make nothing that we must buy that is not made elsewhere but
Marklin have to survive to keep three rail going although as said in another thread they womnt gey much is anything from me this year.
Bit like M track and IB etc when those who have it and like it spring to its defence when really there is no reason as the majority just enjoy model rail whatever they use.

dave

Fair right, my friend - never trusted 'em when it came to their newfandangled CS1 stuff.
Luckily I bought two brand new #6021 starter sets dirt cheap when they been on sale, then.
That way I even got two of M's top-of-the-line digital controller. More than I'll ever need

Is there anything new on the development of extra features of MFX since its conception?
I think not.

While DCC is an open system and continues to expand; adding new features as they go.
Let's face it; it's unlikely that DCC will ever fold.

The same cannot be said with MFX:
Worst case scenario, ten years from now and it may again suffer the same fate as Marklin-Motorola protocol.
This will boomerang back at Marklin,
particularly as it'll be difficult to attract new customers with an outdated "must-have" protocol,
though existing customers probably wouldn't mind much.

Now M* has the sole responsibility of further developing MFX,
but things has changed since late-90s, early-2000s.
Marklin's revenue has more than halved,
and crucially, it no longer has any partner for which to develop MFX
Dare I say it?

I would think that after Marklin-ESU debacle, it's hard to imagine if anyone want to partner with M* in developing MFX2.

Luckily for us, there are two crucial development initiated during the MFX implementation stage:
One - the use of 21-pin decoder and mtc PCB. This would guarantee customers that should their MFX decoder technology become obsolete, they can easily swap the decoder. Gone were the days when every Marklin (DELTA and 6090x) decoder was custom-built according to each model's chassis.

Two - crucially, the two top available controller for Marklin users these days; ECoS and CS2 can both read MFX and DCC. This would greatly help should the worst case scenario happen.

Best case scenario is that in the near future, a true MFX-DCC multi-protocol decoder will be developed,
so that any future MFX could piggyback on any advancement made in DCC.

Hi Tim. Dont think Marklin has a problem finding a new manufacturer. Whoever makes the CS2 appears to be OK and happy to do so. Big difference is they dont also retail their own version. ESU have lost decoder sales not only to Marklin but others as well.
I dont think MFX is any big deal as other than registering the loco just exactly what else does it do.
As I have said before we need a bigger maufacturer (Sony .. Toshiba etc) to make our decoders and that way we would get then cheaper, smaller and better. Perhaps a decent computer manufacurer could also make a controller for Marklin which does more and again would be cheaper.

dave

Thanks for the link,
now we also know that CS2 is produced in Malaysia.