Seriously, Tektronix?

[josephkk]

On Mon, 05 May 2014 15:25:05 -0700, John Larkin
<jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 05 May 2014 10:23:46 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Phil Hobbs wrote:
From the email slush pile this morning:

Tektronix

-----------------------------------------------------

Windows XP Support Has Ended. We're Here to Help.

-----------------------------------------------------

Dear Phil,

As of April 8th, 2014, Microsoft stopped issuing security updates and
providing technical support for systems running its' Windows XP
operating system...including oscilloscopes. Protect your investment by
upgrading your Tektronix oscilloscope to a Windows 7 version
(MSO/DPO5000B, DPO7000C, or DPO/MSO70000C/DX) today.

An upgraded oscilloscope will not only protect your instrument from
security threats and technical issues, it will also provide you with
additional measurement capabilities, including:

- Serial Decoding for over 15 different serial buses (PCI Express,
Ethernet, I2C, etc.)
- The award winning Visual Trigger system, an intuitive graphical
triggering system
- Compliance test packages for a variety of serial standards to ensure
faster pass / fail conclusions

Protect your oscilloscope investment by upgrading your instrument's
software or trading up to an entirely new device. Take action today!

I WANT TO PROTECT MY INVESTMENT
http://info.tek.com/protect-your-scope.html

-------------------

So the way to "protect my scope" is to throw it out and buy a new one,
just because of their crappy choice of OS.

Their marketing droid is obviously an Obamanaut. "We have to destroy
your (scope, insurance, economy, liberty, village) to save it."


Many of them are like that. Always looking for a way to force customers
to abandon the older product. "Oh sorry, out of support, we can't
service this gear anymore".


My protection method is to buy top-of-the-line boat anchors instead.
Cheap, powerful, no Windows, no worries. (Unless I need to go on a
service call.)


20-30 push-ups 3-4 times a day and 100 miles of serious mountain biking
per week will help with that.

I went in another direction, looking for super-light USB-driven
instruments. For fast samling scopes there isn't much out there,
unfortunately. Don't know why because designing fast sampling gear isn't
really rocket science. Maybe not enough market.

Pico does USB samplers

http://www.picotech.com/picoscope9000.html

but the prices are serious. It's actually not hard to do, and the
parts are cheap.

A 60 ps TDR wouldn't be terribly hard, either. The worst part would be
the Windows software.

At those prices, they are just daring you to undercut them. Moreover,
given the your product line you can do it. Go get 'em.

?-)

 

[josephkk]

On Mon, 05 May 2014 10:23:46 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

Their marketing droid is obviously an Obamanaut. "We have to destroy
your (scope, insurance, economy, liberty, village) to save it."


Many of them are like that. Always looking for a way to force customers
to abandon the older product. "Oh sorry, out of support, we can't
service this gear anymore".


My protection method is to buy top-of-the-line boat anchors instead.
Cheap, powerful, no Windows, no worries. (Unless I need to go on a
service call.)


20-30 push-ups 3-4 times a day and 100 miles of serious mountain biking
per week will help with that.

I went in another direction, looking for super-light USB-driven
instruments. For fast samling scopes there isn't much out there,
unfortunately. Don't know why because designing fast sampling gear isn't
really rocket science. Maybe not enough market.

Maybe there is enough market. Look at the prices. Maybe do something
about it. Just be sure that the company that produces the nice stuff is
at least 2 arms length from your bread and butter.

?-)

 

[josephkk]

On Wed, 07 May 2014 12:36:13 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

I've got a Taiwan-designed scope as my main workhorse and I am happy.

I'm talking about the attached scopes, not bench scopes.


I recall someone saying there was open source software for a scope front
panel. But I have never found it. Anyone know what that would be?


What good would that do it the control registers are all different
because they depend on HW? Front panels are easy.

If you say so. The front panel is one part of a scope that is pretty
universal and so can be standardized. Some UI features would
potentially be absent from any given set of hardware or more likely the
software feature set. Those can be omitted or greyed out of menus.

The exact hardware will differ, but it should be pretty easy to write a
layer equivalent to a BIOS that adapts the various operations of the
scope to the specific hardware involved.

I'm not proposing that this be done, I have read that the software
exists. I'm just asking if anyone knows about it.

I understand you well. I have written that kind of software myself about
30 years ago. Writing for 'scopes is a major change in breadth, but not a
change in reach. Doable. In a sense some of the NI scope stuff does
this.

?-)

 

I remember that doodad I made to replace the IC in a HP scope that was unobtaniujm.

That is how we need to think whe it comes to this shit.

And this is SED, you guys should be able to design circles around those fuckers in the 1970s !

Cancha ?

 

[rickman]

On 5/8/2014 9:38 AM, Mikko OH2HVJ wrote:

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:

I've been looking at Hantek. I just can't find anyone who has used
one. Saying "it works" is not exactly a great endorsement. Have you
tried it yourself? That might mean a bit more when saying, "it
works". lol

We bought the 100MHz scope about two years ago and the firmware was crap.
The timebase and verticals could only be changed while auto triggering or
stopped and the measurements showed wrong results. Went back to
Rigols.

I've upgraded the FW to the latest one and used it a few times. Feels
much more responsive, but I haven't yet used it for real work.
If they have fixed the glitches, the scope is good value for money.

The larger, higher resolution display is a definite plus compared to
the basic Rigol.

I'm a little confused which units you are referring to. Are you saying
you upgraded the firmware on the Hantek USB scope or a standard benchtop
model? They make both. What has a higher resolution display exactly?
One of my concerns for the attached scope is that the display will
somehow be limited to a fixed resolution and you won't be able to expand
the window to make the image larger. My screen is 1920x1080 (full HD)
and the 800x600 resolution they state in the spec will be less than a
quarter of the screen size, a bit too small for my taste.

I will say "wrong results" is pretty much a show stopper. That is the
single most basic requirement for the scope that it show you valid data
at all times.

--

Rick

 

[Lasse Langwadt Christense]

Den mandag den 5. maj 2014 19.23.46 UTC+2 skrev Joerg:

Phil Hobbs wrote:

From the email slush pile this morning:



Tektronix



-----------------------------------------------------



Windows XP Support Has Ended. We're Here to Help.



-----------------------------------------------------



Dear Phil,



As of April 8th, 2014, Microsoft stopped issuing security updates and

providing technical support for systems running its' Windows XP

operating system...including oscilloscopes. Protect your investment by

upgrading your Tektronix oscilloscope to a Windows 7 version

(MSO/DPO5000B, DPO7000C, or DPO/MSO70000C/DX) today.



An upgraded oscilloscope will not only protect your instrument from

security threats and technical issues, it will also provide you with

additional measurement capabilities, including:



- Serial Decoding for over 15 different serial buses (PCI Express,

Ethernet, I2C, etc.)

- The award winning Visual Trigger system, an intuitive graphical

triggering system

- Compliance test packages for a variety of serial standards to ensure

faster pass / fail conclusions



Protect your oscilloscope investment by upgrading your instrument's

software or trading up to an entirely new device. Take action today!



I WANT TO PROTECT MY INVESTMENT

http://info.tek.com/protect-your-scope.html



-------------------



So the way to "protect my scope" is to throw it out and buy a new one,

just because of their crappy choice of OS.



Their marketing droid is obviously an Obamanaut. "We have to destroy

your (scope, insurance, economy, liberty, village) to save it."





Many of them are like that. Always looking for a way to force customers

to abandon the older product. "Oh sorry, out of support, we can't

service this gear anymore".





My protection method is to buy top-of-the-line boat anchors instead.

Cheap, powerful, no Windows, no worries. (Unless I need to go on a

service call.)





20-30 push-ups 3-4 times a day and 100 miles of serious mountain biking

per week will help with that.



I went in another direction, looking for super-light USB-driven

instruments. For fast samling scopes there isn't much out there,

unfortunately. Don't know why because designing fast sampling gear isn't

really rocket science. Maybe not enough market.

how fast is fast?

-Lasse

 

[Mikko OH2HVJ]

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:

On 5/8/2014 9:38 AM, Mikko OH2HVJ wrote:
The larger, higher resolution display is a definite plus compared to
the basic Rigol.

I'm a little confused which units you are referring to. Are you
saying you upgraded the firmware on the Hantek USB scope or a standard
benchtop model? They make both.

I'm referring to a benchtop model, DSO5102B. I should have checked
the model number before posting!

I will say "wrong results" is pretty much a show stopper. That is the
single most basic requirement for the scope that it show you valid
data at all times.

That's why we went back to Rigols and the Hanteks ended up in storage.
I updated one and now it seems better, but I have not done extensive
testing.

--
Mikko

 

[Joerg]

krw@attt.bizz wrote:

On Wed, 07 May 2014 18:55:37 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 07:37:02 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 05/06/2014 08:56 PM, krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 10:35:39 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 09:48:49 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 05 May 2014 15:53:03 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
[...]

[...]


A 60 ps TDR wouldn't be terribly hard, either. The worst part
would be
the Windows software.

I didn't go below 200psec and mainly because the medium to be probed
doesn't support any lower. Haven't tried it out in real life yet
because
the boards aren't back but this kind of stuff usually comes out as
simulated, or pretty close.
The thing about doing a TDR is competing with Tek 11801s on ebay. But
there IS a market that I think would work.

I am not so sure about the market. I've helped a lot of start-up
clients
equip their labs initially. Rarely did they ever truly need even as
much
as a 200MHz BW scope. Most of the time a 50-100MHz budget deal was all
it took.
There is a market. I just haven't had time to work on it.

For TDR (which is fairly easy) there are markets but I really don't see
one for regular sampling scopes like what the Tek 11801 was. Else they
wouldn't pawn them off for around $1k like here:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Tektronix-11801B-Digital-Sampling-Oscilloscope-with-Module-SD-26-/191018227396?pt=BI_Oscilloscopes&hash=item2c7992d6c4


Because not all companies buy on eBay? Because it's just as much work
to buy a $30K scope as it is a $300 scope (well, the only TDR I've
seen recently is more like $100K)? Because the keepers of the capital
equipment inventory lists, instrumentation, and calibration will never
sign off on such things?

Even for engineering use?
Yes. We don't do manufacturing (here). Processes are processes.
ISO9K, and all that rot.

Nah.

http://www.iso9000resources.com/ba/calirbration-maintenence-introduction.cfm

Quote "Many companies don't calibrate rarely used engineering/service
equipment because of the cost. As long as the equipment is not used for
validation and the equipment is controlled, it is OK".

*THEY* don't. So?

I went through ISO training sessions galore. It means it's legit as long
as you have proper procedures set up.

For some gear you even have to because there are no calibration services
for those or support has been discontinued. Just ran into yet another
case of that this morning.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

 

[Joerg]

josephkk wrote:

On Mon, 05 May 2014 10:23:46 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

Their marketing droid is obviously an Obamanaut. "We have to destroy
your (scope, insurance, economy, liberty, village) to save it."

Many of them are like that. Always looking for a way to force customers
to abandon the older product. "Oh sorry, out of support, we can't
service this gear anymore".


My protection method is to buy top-of-the-line boat anchors instead.
Cheap, powerful, no Windows, no worries. (Unless I need to go on a
service call.)

20-30 push-ups 3-4 times a day and 100 miles of serious mountain biking
per week will help with that.

I went in another direction, looking for super-light USB-driven
instruments. For fast samling scopes there isn't much out there,
unfortunately. Don't know why because designing fast sampling gear isn't
really rocket science. Maybe not enough market.

Maybe there is enough market. Look at the prices. Maybe do something
about it. Just be sure that the company that produces the nice stuff is
at least 2 arms length from your bread and butter.

If I had the time I'd do it because equivalent time sampling isn't that
hard to do. But I've got no time for that right now. Plus I am in
California and that state is too business-hostile to have a full
operations with producton, employees and sales going. I'd have to move
to Texas first

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

 

[Joerg]

Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:

Den mandag den 5. maj 2014 19.23.46 UTC+2 skrev Joerg:
Phil Hobbs wrote:

From the email slush pile this morning:
Tektronix
-----------------------------------------------------
Windows XP Support Has Ended. We're Here to Help.
-----------------------------------------------------
Dear Phil,
As of April 8th, 2014, Microsoft stopped issuing security updates and
providing technical support for systems running its' Windows XP
operating system...including oscilloscopes. Protect your investment by
upgrading your Tektronix oscilloscope to a Windows 7 version
(MSO/DPO5000B, DPO7000C, or DPO/MSO70000C/DX) today.
An upgraded oscilloscope will not only protect your instrument from
security threats and technical issues, it will also provide you with
additional measurement capabilities, including:
- Serial Decoding for over 15 different serial buses (PCI Express,
Ethernet, I2C, etc.)
- The award winning Visual Trigger system, an intuitive graphical
triggering system
- Compliance test packages for a variety of serial standards to ensure
faster pass / fail conclusions
Protect your oscilloscope investment by upgrading your instrument's
software or trading up to an entirely new device. Take action today!
I WANT TO PROTECT MY INVESTMENT
http://info.tek.com/protect-your-scope.html
-------------------
So the way to "protect my scope" is to throw it out and buy a new one,
just because of their crappy choice of OS.
Their marketing droid is obviously an Obamanaut. "We have to destroy
your (scope, insurance, economy, liberty, village) to save it."


Many of them are like that. Always looking for a way to force customers

to abandon the older product. "Oh sorry, out of support, we can't

service this gear anymore".





My protection method is to buy top-of-the-line boat anchors instead.
Cheap, powerful, no Windows, no worries. (Unless I need to go on a
service call.)


20-30 push-ups 3-4 times a day and 100 miles of serious mountain biking

per week will help with that.



I went in another direction, looking for super-light USB-driven

instruments. For fast samling scopes there isn't much out there,

unfortunately. Don't know why because designing fast sampling gear isn't

really rocket science. Maybe not enough market.


how fast is fast?

One of mine will sample at 200psec but a slower one gets built first
because it is much cheaper (it's a project where 10 bucks really
matter). It would not have been a serious stretch to get that towards
100psec but in our case the load would not have supported that kind of
bandwidth.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

 

[John Larkin]

On Fri, 09 May 2014 15:59:14 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 18:55:37 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 07:37:02 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 05/06/2014 08:56 PM, krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 10:35:39 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 09:48:49 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 05 May 2014 15:53:03 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
[...]

[...]


A 60 ps TDR wouldn't be terribly hard, either. The worst part
would be
the Windows software.

I didn't go below 200psec and mainly because the medium to be probed
doesn't support any lower. Haven't tried it out in real life yet
because
the boards aren't back but this kind of stuff usually comes out as
simulated, or pretty close.
The thing about doing a TDR is competing with Tek 11801s on ebay. But
there IS a market that I think would work.

I am not so sure about the market. I've helped a lot of start-up
clients
equip their labs initially. Rarely did they ever truly need even as
much
as a 200MHz BW scope. Most of the time a 50-100MHz budget deal was all
it took.
There is a market. I just haven't had time to work on it.

For TDR (which is fairly easy) there are markets but I really don't see
one for regular sampling scopes like what the Tek 11801 was. Else they
wouldn't pawn them off for around $1k like here:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Tektronix-11801B-Digital-Sampling-Oscilloscope-with-Module-SD-26-/191018227396?pt=BI_Oscilloscopes&hash=item2c7992d6c4


Because not all companies buy on eBay? Because it's just as much work
to buy a $30K scope as it is a $300 scope (well, the only TDR I've
seen recently is more like $100K)? Because the keepers of the capital
equipment inventory lists, instrumentation, and calibration will never
sign off on such things?

Even for engineering use?
Yes. We don't do manufacturing (here). Processes are processes.
ISO9K, and all that rot.

Nah.

http://www.iso9000resources.com/ba/calirbration-maintenence-introduction.cfm

Quote "Many companies don't calibrate rarely used engineering/service
equipment because of the cost. As long as the equipment is not used for
validation and the equipment is controlled, it is OK".

*THEY* don't. So?


I went through ISO training sessions galore. It means it's legit as long
as you have proper procedures set up.

For some gear you even have to because there are no calibration services
for those or support has been discontinued. Just ran into yet another
case of that this morning.

So, what's the oldest piece of test gear that anybody here still uses?

I have some GR decade resistor and divider boxes that must be 1960's
stuff, still in use.

And an HP608 RF signal generator, but I don't use it much these days.

I also have some really old Tek scopes, 535/545/547, but don't use
them any more.

Our little HP 6212A power supply is really old, and works great.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

On Fri, 09 May 2014 15:59:14 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 18:55:37 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 07:37:02 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 05/06/2014 08:56 PM, krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 10:35:39 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 09:48:49 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 05 May 2014 15:53:03 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
[...]

[...]


A 60 ps TDR wouldn't be terribly hard, either. The worst part
would be
the Windows software.

I didn't go below 200psec and mainly because the medium to be probed
doesn't support any lower. Haven't tried it out in real life yet
because
the boards aren't back but this kind of stuff usually comes out as
simulated, or pretty close.
The thing about doing a TDR is competing with Tek 11801s on ebay. But
there IS a market that I think would work.

I am not so sure about the market. I've helped a lot of start-up
clients
equip their labs initially. Rarely did they ever truly need even as
much
as a 200MHz BW scope. Most of the time a 50-100MHz budget deal was all
it took.
There is a market. I just haven't had time to work on it.

For TDR (which is fairly easy) there are markets but I really don't see
one for regular sampling scopes like what the Tek 11801 was. Else they
wouldn't pawn them off for around $1k like here:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Tektronix-11801B-Digital-Sampling-Oscilloscope-with-Module-SD-26-/191018227396?pt=BI_Oscilloscopes&hash=item2c7992d6c4


Because not all companies buy on eBay? Because it's just as much work
to buy a $30K scope as it is a $300 scope (well, the only TDR I've
seen recently is more like $100K)? Because the keepers of the capital
equipment inventory lists, instrumentation, and calibration will never
sign off on such things?

Even for engineering use?
Yes. We don't do manufacturing (here). Processes are processes.
ISO9K, and all that rot.

Nah.

http://www.iso9000resources.com/ba/calirbration-maintenence-introduction.cfm

Quote "Many companies don't calibrate rarely used engineering/service
equipment because of the cost. As long as the equipment is not used for
validation and the equipment is controlled, it is OK".

*THEY* don't. So?


I went through ISO training sessions galore. It means it's legit as long
as you have proper procedures set up.

I've done more than my share of ISO training (was the first one to go
through the full-banana ISO audit at IBM P'ok). The issue is the
process. If the process says that thou shalt shit in your hat...

For some gear you even have to because there are no calibration services
for those or support has been discontinued. Just ran into yet another
case of that this morning.

Can't have that gear, obviously.

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 5/9/2014 8:06 PM, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 09 May 2014 15:59:14 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 18:55:37 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 07:37:02 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 05/06/2014 08:56 PM, krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 10:35:39 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 09:48:49 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 05 May 2014 15:53:03 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
[...]

[...]


A 60 ps TDR wouldn't be terribly hard, either. The worst part
would be
the Windows software.

I didn't go below 200psec and mainly because the medium to be probed
doesn't support any lower. Haven't tried it out in real life yet
because
the boards aren't back but this kind of stuff usually comes out as
simulated, or pretty close.
The thing about doing a TDR is competing with Tek 11801s on ebay. But
there IS a market that I think would work.

I am not so sure about the market. I've helped a lot of start-up
clients
equip their labs initially. Rarely did they ever truly need even as
much
as a 200MHz BW scope. Most of the time a 50-100MHz budget deal was all
it took.
There is a market. I just haven't had time to work on it.

For TDR (which is fairly easy) there are markets but I really don't see
one for regular sampling scopes like what the Tek 11801 was. Else they
wouldn't pawn them off for around $1k like here:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Tektronix-11801B-Digital-Sampling-Oscilloscope-with-Module-SD-26-/191018227396?pt=BI_Oscilloscopes&hash=item2c7992d6c4


Because not all companies buy on eBay? Because it's just as much work
to buy a $30K scope as it is a $300 scope (well, the only TDR I've
seen recently is more like $100K)? Because the keepers of the capital
equipment inventory lists, instrumentation, and calibration will never
sign off on such things?

Even for engineering use?
Yes. We don't do manufacturing (here). Processes are processes.
ISO9K, and all that rot.

Nah.

http://www.iso9000resources.com/ba/calirbration-maintenence-introduction.cfm

Quote "Many companies don't calibrate rarely used engineering/service
equipment because of the cost. As long as the equipment is not used for
validation and the equipment is controlled, it is OK".

*THEY* don't. So?


I went through ISO training sessions galore. It means it's legit as long
as you have proper procedures set up.

For some gear you even have to because there are no calibration services
for those or support has been discontinued. Just ran into yet another
case of that this morning.

So, what's the oldest piece of test gear that anybody here still uses?

I have some GR decade resistor and divider boxes that must be 1960's
stuff, still in use.

And an HP608 RF signal generator, but I don't use it much these days.

Measurements 59 Megacycle Meter (The best dip meter ever built AFAICT).

Keithley 405 Micro-Microammeter (100 fA full scale range, in 1964).

Universal Avometer Model 8 Mk IV (the last of the classic AVOs)

HP 200 CD audio oscillator (Not fixed yet, but I'll use it when it is).


> Our little HP 6212A power supply is really old, and works great.

I have a 6112A that still works beautifully. I chucked out a couple of
the 3 kV ones because I could hear their transformers arcing.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

 

[Tom Miller]

"Phil Hobbs" <hobbs@electrooptical.net> wrote in message
news:536D6F22.1010906@electrooptical.net...

On 5/9/2014 8:06 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 09 May 2014 15:59:14 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 18:55:37 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 07:37:02 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 05/06/2014 08:56 PM, krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 10:35:39 -0700, Joerg
invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 09:48:49 -0700, Joerg
invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 05 May 2014 15:53:03 -0700, Joerg
invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
[...]

[...]


A 60 ps TDR wouldn't be terribly hard, either. The worst
part
would be
the Windows software.

I didn't go below 200psec and mainly because the medium to be
probed
doesn't support any lower. Haven't tried it out in real life
yet
because
the boards aren't back but this kind of stuff usually comes
out as
simulated, or pretty close.
The thing about doing a TDR is competing with Tek 11801s on
ebay. But
there IS a market that I think would work.

I am not so sure about the market. I've helped a lot of
start-up
clients
equip their labs initially. Rarely did they ever truly need
even as
much
as a 200MHz BW scope. Most of the time a 50-100MHz budget deal
was all
it took.
There is a market. I just haven't had time to work on it.

For TDR (which is fairly easy) there are markets but I really
don't see
one for regular sampling scopes like what the Tek 11801 was. Else
they
wouldn't pawn them off for around $1k like here:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Tektronix-11801B-Digital-Sampling-Oscilloscope-with-Module-SD-26-/191018227396?pt=BI_Oscilloscopes&hash=item2c7992d6c4


Because not all companies buy on eBay? Because it's just as much
work
to buy a $30K scope as it is a $300 scope (well, the only TDR I've
seen recently is more like $100K)? Because the keepers of the
capital
equipment inventory lists, instrumentation, and calibration will
never
sign off on such things?

Even for engineering use?
Yes. We don't do manufacturing (here). Processes are processes.
ISO9K, and all that rot.

Nah.

http://www.iso9000resources.com/ba/calirbration-maintenence-introduction.cfm

Quote "Many companies don't calibrate rarely used engineering/service
equipment because of the cost. As long as the equipment is not used
for
validation and the equipment is controlled, it is OK".

*THEY* don't. So?


I went through ISO training sessions galore. It means it's legit as long
as you have proper procedures set up.

For some gear you even have to because there are no calibration services
for those or support has been discontinued. Just ran into yet another
case of that this morning.

So, what's the oldest piece of test gear that anybody here still uses?

I have some GR decade resistor and divider boxes that must be 1960's
stuff, still in use.

And an HP608 RF signal generator, but I don't use it much these days.


Measurements 59 Megacycle Meter (The best dip meter ever built AFAICT).

Keithley 405 Micro-Microammeter (100 fA full scale range, in 1964).

Universal Avometer Model 8 Mk IV (the last of the classic AVOs)

HP 200 CD audio oscillator (Not fixed yet, but I'll use it when it is).


Our little HP 6212A power supply is really old, and works great.

I have a 6112A that still works beautifully. I chucked out a couple of
the 3 kV ones because I could hear their transformers arcing.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--

Hey, I have a Measurements Model 80 sig gen.

It still works.

 

"I also have some really old Tek scopes, 535/545/547, but don't use
them any more. "

Oh, the bodybuilder models.

You know you can use them with super long probes and binoculars - I mean in case you can't lift them anymore.

Of course those explain the reason why the Tek scopemobiles were so expensive...

 

[Joerg]

krw@attt.bizz wrote:

On Fri, 09 May 2014 15:59:14 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 18:55:37 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 07:37:02 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 05/06/2014 08:56 PM, krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 10:35:39 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 09:48:49 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 05 May 2014 15:53:03 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
[...]

[...]


A 60 ps TDR wouldn't be terribly hard, either. The worst part
would be
the Windows software.

I didn't go below 200psec and mainly because the medium to be probed
doesn't support any lower. Haven't tried it out in real life yet
because
the boards aren't back but this kind of stuff usually comes out as
simulated, or pretty close.
The thing about doing a TDR is competing with Tek 11801s on ebay. But
there IS a market that I think would work.

I am not so sure about the market. I've helped a lot of start-up
clients
equip their labs initially. Rarely did they ever truly need even as
much
as a 200MHz BW scope. Most of the time a 50-100MHz budget deal was all
it took.
There is a market. I just haven't had time to work on it.

For TDR (which is fairly easy) there are markets but I really don't see
one for regular sampling scopes like what the Tek 11801 was. Else they
wouldn't pawn them off for around $1k like here:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Tektronix-11801B-Digital-Sampling-Oscilloscope-with-Module-SD-26-/191018227396?pt=BI_Oscilloscopes&hash=item2c7992d6c4


Because not all companies buy on eBay? Because it's just as much work
to buy a $30K scope as it is a $300 scope (well, the only TDR I've
seen recently is more like $100K)? Because the keepers of the capital
equipment inventory lists, instrumentation, and calibration will never
sign off on such things?

Even for engineering use?
Yes. We don't do manufacturing (here). Processes are processes.
ISO9K, and all that rot.

Nah.

http://www.iso9000resources.com/ba/calirbration-maintenence-introduction.cfm

Quote "Many companies don't calibrate rarely used engineering/service
equipment because of the cost. As long as the equipment is not used for
validation and the equipment is controlled, it is OK".

*THEY* don't. So?

I went through ISO training sessions galore. It means it's legit as long
as you have proper procedures set up.

I've done more than my share of ISO training (was the first one to go
through the full-banana ISO audit at IBM P'ok). The issue is the
process. If the process says that thou shalt shit in your hat...

Think about it: Who writes the procedure for the process?

For some gear you even have to because there are no calibration services
for those or support has been discontinued. Just ran into yet another
case of that this morning.

Can't have that gear, obviously.

Sure. I'll just have to see if I can return this machine (or donate it)
and buy another one of same type that has the feature we need enabled.

The problem was that they threw out all activation codes for firmware
options. I had my credit card ready, they could have made a nice sale
right there, with a bare minimum of investment on their part (about 60
seconds of their time). Beats me why large corporations shoot themselves
in the foot so often.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

 

[Joerg]

Phil Hobbs wrote:

On 5/9/2014 8:06 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 09 May 2014 15:59:14 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 18:55:37 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 07:37:02 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 05/06/2014 08:56 PM, krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 10:35:39 -0700, Joerg
invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 09:48:49 -0700, Joerg
invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 05 May 2014 15:53:03 -0700, Joerg
invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
[...]

[...]


A 60 ps TDR wouldn't be terribly hard, either. The worst
part
would be
the Windows software.

I didn't go below 200psec and mainly because the medium to
be probed
doesn't support any lower. Haven't tried it out in real
life yet
because
the boards aren't back but this kind of stuff usually
comes out as
simulated, or pretty close.
The thing about doing a TDR is competing with Tek 11801s on
ebay. But
there IS a market that I think would work.

I am not so sure about the market. I've helped a lot of
start-up
clients
equip their labs initially. Rarely did they ever truly need
even as
much
as a 200MHz BW scope. Most of the time a 50-100MHz budget
deal was all
it took.
There is a market. I just haven't had time to work on it.

For TDR (which is fairly easy) there are markets but I really
don't see
one for regular sampling scopes like what the Tek 11801 was.
Else they
wouldn't pawn them off for around $1k like here:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Tektronix-11801B-Digital-Sampling-Oscilloscope-with-Module-SD-26-/191018227396?pt=BI_Oscilloscopes&hash=item2c7992d6c4



Because not all companies buy on eBay? Because it's just as
much work
to buy a $30K scope as it is a $300 scope (well, the only TDR I've
seen recently is more like $100K)? Because the keepers of the
capital
equipment inventory lists, instrumentation, and calibration
will never
sign off on such things?

Even for engineering use?
Yes. We don't do manufacturing (here). Processes are processes.
ISO9K, and all that rot.

Nah.

http://www.iso9000resources.com/ba/calirbration-maintenence-introduction.cfm


Quote "Many companies don't calibrate rarely used engineering/service
equipment because of the cost. As long as the equipment is not used
for
validation and the equipment is controlled, it is OK".

*THEY* don't. So?


I went through ISO training sessions galore. It means it's legit as long
as you have proper procedures set up.

For some gear you even have to because there are no calibration services
for those or support has been discontinued. Just ran into yet another
case of that this morning.

So, what's the oldest piece of test gear that anybody here still uses?

I have some GR decade resistor and divider boxes that must be 1960's
stuff, still in use.

And an HP608 RF signal generator, but I don't use it much these days.


Measurements 59 Megacycle Meter (The best dip meter ever built AFAICT).

Same here. There are some things where they break the mold and make'em
no more like they used to. Kids these days (including a lot of
middle-age engineers) don't even know what a dip meter is.

Then I've got some gear that I built as a teenager that I still use,
hi-Z amps and stuff. My oldest piece for lab use is probably this,
should be well over 100 years old now:

http://www.radiomuseum.org/r/weston_nebenschluss_widerstand_60_mv_2_ohm.html

Rated at a whopping 150 amps. I had a lot more including a nice meter
that goes with this series but donated that to the California Radio Museum.

[...]

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

 

On Sat, 10 May 2014 13:38:41 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Fri, 09 May 2014 15:59:14 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 18:55:37 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 07:37:02 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 05/06/2014 08:56 PM, krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 10:35:39 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 09:48:49 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 05 May 2014 15:53:03 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
[...]

[...]


A 60 ps TDR wouldn't be terribly hard, either. The worst part
would be
the Windows software.

I didn't go below 200psec and mainly because the medium to be probed
doesn't support any lower. Haven't tried it out in real life yet
because
the boards aren't back but this kind of stuff usually comes out as
simulated, or pretty close.
The thing about doing a TDR is competing with Tek 11801s on ebay. But
there IS a market that I think would work.

I am not so sure about the market. I've helped a lot of start-up
clients
equip their labs initially. Rarely did they ever truly need even as
much
as a 200MHz BW scope. Most of the time a 50-100MHz budget deal was all
it took.
There is a market. I just haven't had time to work on it.

For TDR (which is fairly easy) there are markets but I really don't see
one for regular sampling scopes like what the Tek 11801 was. Else they
wouldn't pawn them off for around $1k like here:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Tektronix-11801B-Digital-Sampling-Oscilloscope-with-Module-SD-26-/191018227396?pt=BI_Oscilloscopes&hash=item2c7992d6c4


Because not all companies buy on eBay? Because it's just as much work
to buy a $30K scope as it is a $300 scope (well, the only TDR I've
seen recently is more like $100K)? Because the keepers of the capital
equipment inventory lists, instrumentation, and calibration will never
sign off on such things?

Even for engineering use?
Yes. We don't do manufacturing (here). Processes are processes.
ISO9K, and all that rot.

Nah.

http://www.iso9000resources.com/ba/calirbration-maintenence-introduction.cfm

Quote "Many companies don't calibrate rarely used engineering/service
equipment because of the cost. As long as the equipment is not used for
validation and the equipment is controlled, it is OK".

*THEY* don't. So?

I went through ISO training sessions galore. It means it's legit as long
as you have proper procedures set up.

I've done more than my share of ISO training (was the first one to go
through the full-banana ISO audit at IBM P'ok). The issue is the
process. If the process says that thou shalt shit in your hat...


Think about it: Who writes the procedure for the process?

That doesn't matter, at all. The fact is that the procedure is there
and it's "worked" for a couple of decades - long before I showed up
(and when it was a manufacturing location with *very* little
engineering). I certainly wouldn't have written the procedure.

For some gear you even have to because there are no calibration services
for those or support has been discontinued. Just ran into yet another
case of that this morning.

Can't have that gear, obviously.


Sure. I'll just have to see if I can return this machine (or donate it)
and buy another one of same type that has the feature we need enabled.

The problem was that they threw out all activation codes for firmware
options. I had my credit card ready, they could have made a nice sale
right there, with a bare minimum of investment on their part (about 60
seconds of their time). Beats me why large corporations shoot themselves
in the foot so often.

Because those who profit aren't those who do the work. There is good
reason for bonuses based on the bottom line. The problem is that
they're so often bogus in a large corporation.

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 5/10/2014 4:48 PM, Joerg wrote:

Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 5/9/2014 8:06 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 09 May 2014 15:59:14 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 18:55:37 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 07:37:02 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 05/06/2014 08:56 PM, krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 10:35:39 -0700, Joerg
invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 09:48:49 -0700, Joerg
invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 05 May 2014 15:53:03 -0700, Joerg
invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
[...]

[...]


A 60 ps TDR wouldn't be terribly hard, either. The worst
part
would be
the Windows software.

I didn't go below 200psec and mainly because the medium to
be probed
doesn't support any lower. Haven't tried it out in real
life yet
because
the boards aren't back but this kind of stuff usually
comes out as
simulated, or pretty close.
The thing about doing a TDR is competing with Tek 11801s on
ebay. But
there IS a market that I think would work.

I am not so sure about the market. I've helped a lot of
start-up
clients
equip their labs initially. Rarely did they ever truly need
even as
much
as a 200MHz BW scope. Most of the time a 50-100MHz budget
deal was all
it took.
There is a market. I just haven't had time to work on it.

For TDR (which is fairly easy) there are markets but I really
don't see
one for regular sampling scopes like what the Tek 11801 was.
Else they
wouldn't pawn them off for around $1k like here:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Tektronix-11801B-Digital-Sampling-Oscilloscope-with-Module-SD-26-/191018227396?pt=BI_Oscilloscopes&hash=item2c7992d6c4



Because not all companies buy on eBay? Because it's just as
much work
to buy a $30K scope as it is a $300 scope (well, the only TDR I've
seen recently is more like $100K)? Because the keepers of the
capital
equipment inventory lists, instrumentation, and calibration
will never
sign off on such things?

Even for engineering use?
Yes. We don't do manufacturing (here). Processes are processes.
ISO9K, and all that rot.

Nah.

http://www.iso9000resources.com/ba/calirbration-maintenence-introduction.cfm


Quote "Many companies don't calibrate rarely used engineering/service
equipment because of the cost. As long as the equipment is not used
for
validation and the equipment is controlled, it is OK".

*THEY* don't. So?


I went through ISO training sessions galore. It means it's legit as long
as you have proper procedures set up.

For some gear you even have to because there are no calibration services
for those or support has been discontinued. Just ran into yet another
case of that this morning.

So, what's the oldest piece of test gear that anybody here still uses?

I have some GR decade resistor and divider boxes that must be 1960's
stuff, still in use.

And an HP608 RF signal generator, but I don't use it much these days.


Measurements 59 Megacycle Meter (The best dip meter ever built AFAICT).


Same here. There are some things where they break the mold and make'em
no more like they used to. Kids these days (including a lot of
middle-age engineers) don't even know what a dip meter is.

I bought mine after you posted a love letter to yours.

What our wives don't know, won't hurt them. Of course there's the old
physicist joke:

A doctor, a lawyer, and a physicist were shooting the breeze in the bar
one afternoon, and the conversation got round to whether one was better
off with a wife or a girlfriend.

"A girlfriend for me" said the lawyer--"I try to stay out of divorce
practice, but the scales are so stacked against men that if a wife wants
to, she can take you for everything you've got and then some."

"A wife all the way, for me" said the doctor--"The crazy hours I have
to keep, being pulled out of family celebrations to look after patients,
a girlfriend would never put up with it."

"I really think I need both" said the physicist, ignoring the raised
eyebrows of his friends--"I can tell the girlfriend I'm with the wife,
and the wife I'm with the girlfriend, and then I CAN GO TO THE LAB!"

My wife thinks this is reportage.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs


--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

 

[Joerg]

Phil Hobbs wrote:

On 5/10/2014 4:48 PM, Joerg wrote:
Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 5/9/2014 8:06 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 09 May 2014 15:59:14 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 18:55:37 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 07:37:02 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 05/06/2014 08:56 PM, krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 10:35:39 -0700, Joerg
invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 09:48:49 -0700, Joerg
invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 05 May 2014 15:53:03 -0700, Joerg
invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
[...]

[...]


A 60 ps TDR wouldn't be terribly hard, either. The worst
part
would be
the Windows software.

I didn't go below 200psec and mainly because the medium to
be probed
doesn't support any lower. Haven't tried it out in real
life yet
because
the boards aren't back but this kind of stuff usually
comes out as
simulated, or pretty close.
The thing about doing a TDR is competing with Tek 11801s on
ebay. But
there IS a market that I think would work.

I am not so sure about the market. I've helped a lot of
start-up
clients
equip their labs initially. Rarely did they ever truly need
even as
much
as a 200MHz BW scope. Most of the time a 50-100MHz budget
deal was all
it took.
There is a market. I just haven't had time to work on it.

For TDR (which is fairly easy) there are markets but I really
don't see
one for regular sampling scopes like what the Tek 11801 was.
Else they
wouldn't pawn them off for around $1k like here:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Tektronix-11801B-Digital-Sampling-Oscilloscope-with-Module-SD-26-/191018227396?pt=BI_Oscilloscopes&hash=item2c7992d6c4




Because not all companies buy on eBay? Because it's just as
much work
to buy a $30K scope as it is a $300 scope (well, the only TDR
I've
seen recently is more like $100K)? Because the keepers of the
capital
equipment inventory lists, instrumentation, and calibration
will never
sign off on such things?

Even for engineering use?
Yes. We don't do manufacturing (here). Processes are processes.
ISO9K, and all that rot.

Nah.

http://www.iso9000resources.com/ba/calirbration-maintenence-introduction.cfm



Quote "Many companies don't calibrate rarely used
engineering/service
equipment because of the cost. As long as the equipment is not used
for
validation and the equipment is controlled, it is OK".

*THEY* don't. So?


I went through ISO training sessions galore. It means it's legit as
long
as you have proper procedures set up.

For some gear you even have to because there are no calibration
services
for those or support has been discontinued. Just ran into yet another
case of that this morning.

So, what's the oldest piece of test gear that anybody here still uses?

I have some GR decade resistor and divider boxes that must be 1960's
stuff, still in use.

And an HP608 RF signal generator, but I don't use it much these days.


Measurements 59 Megacycle Meter (The best dip meter ever built AFAICT).


Same here. There are some things where they break the mold and make'em
no more like they used to. Kids these days (including a lot of
middle-age engineers) don't even know what a dip meter is.

I bought mine after you posted a love letter to yours.

What our wives don't know, won't hurt them. Of course there's the old
physicist joke:

A doctor, a lawyer, and a physicist were shooting the breeze in the bar
one afternoon, and the conversation got round to whether one was better
off with a wife or a girlfriend.

"A girlfriend for me" said the lawyer--"I try to stay out of divorce
practice, but the scales are so stacked against men that if a wife wants
to, she can take you for everything you've got and then some."

"A wife all the way, for me" said the doctor--"The crazy hours I have
to keep, being pulled out of family celebrations to look after patients,
a girlfriend would never put up with it."

"I really think I need both" said the physicist, ignoring the raised
eyebrows of his friends--"I can tell the girlfriend I'm with the wife,
and the wife I'm with the girlfriend, and then I CAN GO TO THE LAB!"

My wife thinks this is reportage.

My wife and I trust each other so each has access to the other's stuff
(except confidential client projects, of course). That includes my
daytimer where she goes in from time to time and fills out our volunteer
time slots, just so I won't line up other commitments for those hours.

A long time ago, before we were married, I wrote into next week's
schedule "Call Lolita" ... "WHO IS LOLITA?!"

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/