Your comparison chart doesn't seem to include your Labrador. Unless you maybe called it "TinyLab" in the chart, but nowhere else on the page?
Confusing.
Also: scope can't measure 3.3v signals?
Wow, that's a typo and a half. TinyLab was the old name of the project. Got changed when someone else took the name.
http://www.tinylab.cc/. Looks like it's been fixed now.
The scope measures everything between -20V to +20V, at up to 750ksps. Can I ask you where you got the idea that it doesn't do 3V3 from? There are probably others in the same boat.
Can you look at these and give some of the differences and similarities? I notice the Labrador has power supply options, and also better logic analyzer. Nice work! I also give you a big for making it all open source!
Regarding the XProtolab, Labrador is a fair bit cheaper (once you factor in postage costs, the XProtolab Plain is $35), has a nicer interface and the scope works differently.
Basically, it samples and transmits at a constant 750ksps no matter what time scale you use, whereas the XProtolab is variable. This gives you a near-infinite sample depth, compared to XProtoLab's 256 bytes. You can record several minutes' worth of signal without dropping a sample, and rhere's some O(1) algorithms working in the back to make sure everything runs smoothly even with huge buffers. The interface was inspired by software like Audacity - you just scroll in and out with the mouse/arrow keys rather than fiddling with scales, offsets and timebases. So it's actually nice to work with, even when the buffers are huge.
The signal gen's range is also much larger (essentially 0-10V with the option of AC coupling) and it's multi-channel. Plus, as you said, the power supply is existent.
I think the XProtolab beats me on the logic analyzer front, though. Mine's only got 2 inputs! Great for serial, but not so great for wide buses.