Sigh. Do you really think context is the last post and the last post alone? It seems you would feel at home on stack exchange.
To reiterate the point, including only the last post removes the context in which the last post was made.
So, you do contend that my screenshot indicates that there is a "blurring of the lines" between clocks, discs, processors, memory, networks and thermometers! Bizarre.
Sigh. Do you really think context is the last post and the last post alone? It seems you would feel at home on stack exchange.
To reiterate the point, including only the last post removes the context in which the last post was made.
So, you do contend that my screenshot indicates that there is a "blurring of the lines" between clocks, discs, processors, memory, networks and thermometers! Bizarre.I've neither confirmed nor denied that assertion.
Do you contend the new Keithley DMM, DAQ and SMU ranges are actually oscilloscopes? Who controls these definitions for each device type and where can they be found? It seems you'd end up like biologists, desperately trying to come up with definitions that'll lead to discrete species but being thwarted by nature every time
Ignoring counter examples never looks good.
I'm afraid I don't keep abreast of all manufacturers latest products displaying incremental changes from previous products, so I can't comment on the Keithley products. But do they market and sell them as oscilloscopes? What are their triggering facilities?
Having said that, most people would agree on the key distinctions between an oscilloscope and a logic analyser: one captures analogue waveforms, the other interprets analogue waveforms as digital signals and filter and post-process those digital signals.
I still use one occasionally, my primary scopes are DSOs but the XY mode on my analog scope blows away every DSO I've tried for that purpose.
I made ths screenshot from my RTB 2004 in X-Y Mode. No idea, what's wrong with that.
It doesn't look that great to me (maybe if C2 was higher amplitude and less noisy). If that's the best it can do on a simple phase shifted sinewave then I wouldn't want to use if for any sort of complex X-Y function.
The last X-Y mode plots look like there is quite some jitter problem. I would guess this could be more like a generator problem. The old analog scope also shows so some distortion - which is more like a scope problem than from the generator - on the DSO the waveform looks reasonably OK.
When using XY mode one usually should turn to single channel. This would remove the extra diagonal on most scopes.
Back in the early 1990s, when the DSO's record length wasn't deep enough (unless one paid a fortune) I was also designing analog-TV baseband circuits.
To properly see the chroma burst and static pattern in the active video, one had to use an analog scope.
Not any scope, but one which had advanced TV triggering capabilities, i.e. trigger from a specific line. But the resulting display was very dim.
For that reason, Tektronix and other manufacturers also sold waveform monitors, which were specialized scopes for the purpose of viewing analog TV signals, see attached image.
Then Tektronix came out with the VM700, one of the first all-digital waveform monitor.
Ever since I first used the VM700 in perhaps 1995, I have never again used an analog scope.
Another thing I like about analog CROs: control inputs are immediate, and tactile. I get to spend time with two expensive digital scopes at work...I have a Tek TDS5k series 1 GHz DPO on my desk and there's a Keysight MSO-X 6k down in the lab. While both are amazingly capable, I absolutely despise having to navigate menus to find functions. Plus, control inputs have an annoying amount of latency between input and effect.
Another thing I like about analog CROs: control inputs are immediate, and tactile. I get to spend time with two expensive digital scopes at work...I have a Tek TDS5k series 1 GHz DPO on my desk and there's a Keysight MSO-X 6k down in the lab. While both are amazingly capable, I absolutely despise having to navigate menus to find functions. Plus, control inputs have an annoying amount of latency between input and effect.That's strange as Keysight's Megazoom oscilloscopes are famed for their immediate hardware accelerated response to inputs and not slowing down when more features are enabled. Does the 6K series run an additional "desktop" Windows layer?
Another thing I like about analog CROs: control inputs are immediate, and tactile. I get to spend time with two expensive digital scopes at work...I have a Tek TDS5k series 1 GHz DPO on my desk and there's a Keysight MSO-X 6k down in the lab. While both are amazingly capable, I absolutely despise having to navigate menus to find functions. Plus, control inputs have an annoying amount of latency between input and effect.That's strange as Keysight's Megazoom oscilloscopes are famed for their immediate hardware accelerated response to inputs and not slowing down when more features are enabled. Does the 6K series run an additional "desktop" Windows layer?I don't think it does; when it boots there is zero sign of windows. It absolutely is faster at responding to inputs than the DPO, which runs windows 2k. But I can still feel that it's just not quite as immediate as my analog 'scopes at home. IMO, YMMV.