| General > General Technical Chat |
| Why do you think there aren't more "good" USB oscilloscopes? |
| << < (6/17) > >> |
| fourfathom:
In the spectrum analyzer world there is SignalHound, and while their original SA-44 analyzer is far from perfect (I have one), their high-end USB analyzers are quite capable and compete well with traditional products (I have one of those, too). The cost difference isn't huge, but I really like the Signalhound PC software, and prefer that to the UI on my regular SA. The smaller form-factor is also an advantage. OK, I have all my gear in my garage lab, unless it's sitting on my desk in the house -- I retired years ago -- but I've had plenty of experience in the industry as a tech and as an engineer. So, perhaps SignalHound compares to Pico. Not Chinese-cheap, good software, good performance, and apparently respected in the industry. So it can be done, just not for $100. |
| Aleksorsist:
The big problem with the current crop of USB scopes is that they're basically built like benchtop scopes without the screen, knobs and PSU. But since that's all commodity, they don't end up being all that cheaper than a comparable benchtop scope with not enough benefits compared to one. I think a fully streaming architecture like the saleae logic series is the right way to make a "good" USB scope (and full disclosure, I am working on one right now). This would make the hardware a lot cheaper (or allow for much better front ends at the same cost), and allow for your device memory to be used as sample memory, as well as your CPU/GPU for advanced triggering, protocol decodes, and analysis. These are more direct spec benefits in addition to the (subjectively) better UI, and portability that USB scopes have always offered. |
| hans:
--- Quote from: David Aurora on February 16, 2023, 11:46:47 am ---[...] Another reason is capturing data. No dicking around saving to a USB drive and converting etc, you just save the file and do whatever you want right where it is. Another reason is programmability, something I'm only just appreciating now. You can make computer based scopes do insane things with a few scripts. You can save really detailed presets. You can filter, average and measure with way more flexibility than DSOs. Another reason is that they're often not just scopes. A lot have logic analysers/AWGs/power supplies/etc. Which means one less thing to lug to a job, or one less device to use on the bench. And this goes back to the programmability thing above too- you can have your signal generator and scope talking to each other easily without having to fuck around with some archaic crap like GBIP. Another reason is floating measurements- plug in a laptop, disconnect the charger and no ground loops. The list goes on. --- End quote --- I think that many modern scopes have USB device functionality, so you can make screengrabs or download waveform data to CSV, or remote control the device. But... they are sooo damn slow to use in my experience. It's feels very much like an afterthought: "so we have this LAN port, let's implement the bare minimum and call it a day". This is akin to my experience with LA's on oscilloscopes. Yes you can do serial decodes to quickly see what's going on.. much better than decoding by hand (if reliable). But other the power features are severely lacking, and this is where you would get a LA. Also, if you're using a scope or LA for any prolonged periods of time, I hope you've made adequate accommodations for a good posture.. Most oscilloscopes still use 10" screens or smaller, with low resolutions, and are placed far at the back of the bench. This makes it a nightmare for eye strain and ergonomics. Having the ability to see waveforms in full HD glory while running code on another screen is great. Most bench-scope USB device I've used don't allow these functions; you either get a screengrab in native res of the scope (sometimes 800x480), or have to use this awkwardly slow waveform downloads and trigger set up to make actual use of the device. I tried to use my bench scopes via USB/LAN at some point in the hopes I don't have to *be* at my soldering/tinkering desk (modern tools have high levels of sophistication right?) but was thoroughly disappointed. If a USB scope can't be used properly via it's supplied desktop software, then likewise with a LA, it's going straight back to the manufacturer. |
| Gyro:
The cheap screens on desktop scopes is something that I still don't get. They seem to have poor resoulutions compared to what you can get out of a tablet screen for instance. Even at 2 channels, with all the menu and readout stuff around the edges you're lucky to get 6 bit resolution on a 2 channel scope, let alone a 4 channel. Is it just cheaping out or lack of processing power? |
| TomKatt:
--- Quote from: Gyro on February 16, 2023, 06:03:22 pm ---The cheap screens on desktop scopes is something that I still don't get. They seem to have poor resoulutions compared to what you can get out of a tablet screen for instance. Even at 2 channels, with all the menu and readout stuff around the edges you're lucky to get 6 bit resolution on a 2 channel scope, let alone a 4 channel. Is it just cheaping out or lack of processing power? --- End quote --- A smart watch has almost as much vertical resolution and nearly half the horizontal than many of these 'big' 7" screens with 800x480 pixels :-DD |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |