Author Topic: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"  (Read 6685 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dejanpri

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 6
  • Country: si
Re: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"
« Reply #50 on: June 26, 2019, 11:22:43 am »
@dejanpri

One thing I', curious about is why write your own scope software from scratch? I've taken a bit of a look at Sigrok, and it seems to me like extending that would have save some work, especially with how constrained your project is in manpower.

Probably the main reason is to have more flexibility with adding new features and also to achieve better performance. Pulseview is OK for basic stuff, but with using our software we can have features like dedicated threads, OpenGL rendering (3D view, virtual persistence) and other hardware control features like sever mode, Python API.
 
The following users thanked this post: prasimix

Offline bloguetronica

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 354
  • Country: pt
Re: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"
« Reply #51 on: July 28, 2019, 03:09:36 am »
Well, it is a good scope, with its price perhaps on the high price. But after all it is an open source project, and I think one can make if for around $300, sourcing some parts from Chine (PCB and some components).

Some may say that the scope is a bit limited, but without this project, there wouldn't be a decent started DIY scope at all. Many DIY projects involving scopes just don't cut it for me (some are not even projects, while others are laughable attempts). This one works as intended, looks professional and the software runs great. I tested the software part, BTW.

What more do you expect?

I don't know why you would expect open source to be cheap.

A well funded manufacturer may produce things in millions, and cost per piece will be a fraction of the production of a single item. The price of the item on the market is determined by supply and demand. Most of what you pay for commercial things is to cover sales and management. Production is a smaller portion, R&D is even less. The company's profit may be a tiny fraction of the cost, may even be negative.

With open source you get free R&D, no sales, no management, no profit to anyone. All you need to pay for is production (but in small quantities).

How's that even possible to compare the two?

Open source anything should either be very inexpensive or free.
Otherwise there is no reason for it it to exist.

Otherwise it just that some first world hipster wants me to pay him to have a hobby, that nobody will benefit from except him...
And companies that are manufacturing stuff at prices nobody else is stupid enough to pay for.

Simple as that.

That is why Open Source software is possible and can be beneficial to humanity. Many nice people are using their free time to make software that is free to legally install and use to accomplish something they wouldn't be able to afford otherwise. All this human time (engineer hours) is donated by kind people, or even companies (when it helps them or makes them look good or also sometimes purely as goodwill). End users get a usable product (sometimes as good as paid one, or if not as good, good enough for many purposes, aka better than nothing.) and it all works because price of manufacturing copies (replication and distribution) in software is very low. So R&D donated, manufacturing almost free. And it works because it is hell of a deal for the money.
Software people don't like it when someone say it, but software is easy.. No, wait, not fair. It is very hard to make and make right and it not easy. But it is more straightforward to test and easier to fix.
You just apply patch and problem is gone. If after a year, developers realize architecture is wrong, the can (and they do) make a new major release. You download and upgrade. Life goes on.

And that is why Open something in hardware doesn't work.  Hardware mistakes cannot be patched from online update. PCB's need to be respined. Components on bad one cannot be reused.
And once it is made to work nicely, you cannot add 2 more channels just like that. Pretty much you have to start from beginning. Than EMC. Even if you don't care if you radiate like crazy, you have to make it resilient to outside EMC. Otherwise it will be unreliable and won't work properly... Measurement instrument will inject crap into signal you're measuring, all kinds of spurs... That won't be properly characterized and documented so you can expect them in results you you know it's not DUT.....
On Open something hardware, only firmware is open, and that has it's limitations, because embedded processors have limited resources... So you can fix some problems, even redesign few little things but major new release means new PCB and parts for 1000 USD. Old one is electronic waste.

All of the Open Something hardware that exist and is somewhat useful has fixed hardware that is much cheaper than commercial counterparts, and only Open part is software (firmware and PC part).
And many time hardware is cheaper because it has hobby grade specifications, that are great for hobby and education. Great example are many SDR modules out there.
And they are great, because there are tens of thousands people in the world that are given opportunity to learn about SDR on something they can afford.

Like James said, if it is not much cheaper that real thing,it shouldn't exist.  Otherwise we are all simply financing some hipster to have a hobby. No, thanks.
No, just no. No, and no, and no.

Just because a project is open source hardware, doesn't mean that the product or its components should be given for free. "Open" means free as in "free speech", not as in "free beer".

Open source software has costs too. It costs energy from volunteers that develop the software, and many volunteers end up being burned out, by the way. Some open source software companies have profits: they don't live from hopes and dreams.

And no, you are not financing a hipster. You are only having a freeloader stance. You think you have to create a mark in the world, reinforcing your "progressive" (aka, regressive) ideas. And then calling "hipster" to people that you don't know.

Doesn't fly well. Your post is just a big no, and deserves no further comment. Try again.

Kind regards, Samuel Lourenço
« Last Edit: July 28, 2019, 03:19:37 am by bloguetronica »
 
The following users thanked this post: janoc, prasimix, citizenrich

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2112
  • Country: hr
Re: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"
« Reply #52 on: July 28, 2019, 08:20:14 am »
Well, it is a good scope, with its price perhaps on the high price. But after all it is an open source project, and I think one can make if for around $300, sourcing some parts from Chine (PCB and some components).

Some may say that the scope is a bit limited, but without this project, there wouldn't be a decent started DIY scope at all. Many DIY projects involving scopes just don't cut it for me (some are not even projects, while others are laughable attempts). This one works as intended, looks professional and the software runs great. I tested the software part, BTW.

What more do you expect?


No you can't make it for 300 USD, because simple hobbyist cannot solder BGA, and parts are very expensive.
And saying it "works as intended, looks professional and the software runs great. I tested the software part, BTW." means nothing.
It is not a open software, it is a scope.

Go back and read what i wrote, again and again until you get it.

And then, if you already didn't, go and buy one from the crowdfunding campaign, with your own money.
Just so you are not a bigot, gallantly trumpeting virtues of open source scope to absolute beginners and other people that doesn't know better, and giving them advice to spend their only hard earned 650 USD on something that is just a promise right now.

OP asked a question to a forum. Is this a good deal for the money and effort ? No it isn't.
At this point it doesn't even exist.  Few days ago they already started extending goals...

So no, if the question is "Is this a good deal?". It's not, not even close. If it exists in a year, and if it works, then, than we will see..

As for Open source hardware, it's you that has it wrong. If it costs a lot it's not free.
It's not Stalin or Hitler that forbids many users to have some piece of T&M equipment.
Mostly it's the price that denies them that "freedom".
So, yeah, as in "free speech" we can talk until next year how great it is that we are "allowed" (free) to be able to get most sophisticated scopes from Keysight, R&S, etc etc...
But because of the price not many people can. They just can't have it, period.

So now we have this thing. It is not even made (it doesn't exist yet), it is as expensive as pro made equipment that does work, it has mediocre specs (does many things but none really well), and those specs are still just wishful thinking because it yet has to verified it really does achieve those specs(or works at all), but it's awesome because they published schematics.

Really?

This is engineering forum. I don't believe in Open Gods (R), or any kind of cults.
All I say is based on facts.
I don't accept "but it is different because Open something....". It's not.
What you do with your own money is your problem.
Giving advice to other people based on your religious/political/activist beliefs is a dick move.
Open Source is and activist/political movement, and not based on real life facts most of the time, apparently.
Whoever wants to do it, good luck, I'm happy for them. But vice versa, people that think differently have a FREEDOM to see things differently.

Best regards,
Sinisa
 

Offline bloguetronica

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 354
  • Country: pt
Re: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"
« Reply #53 on: July 28, 2019, 11:30:37 am »
Well, it is a good scope, with its price perhaps on the high price. But after all it is an open source project, and I think one can make if for around $300, sourcing some parts from Chine (PCB and some components).

Some may say that the scope is a bit limited, but without this project, there wouldn't be a decent started DIY scope at all. Many DIY projects involving scopes just don't cut it for me (some are not even projects, while others are laughable attempts). This one works as intended, looks professional and the software runs great. I tested the software part, BTW.

What more do you expect?


No you can't make it for 300 USD, because simple hobbyist cannot solder BGA, and parts are very expensive.
And saying it "works as intended, looks professional and the software runs great. I tested the software part, BTW." means nothing.
It is not a open software, it is a scope.

Go back and read what i wrote, again and again until you get it.

And then, if you already didn't, go and buy one from the crowdfunding campaign, with your own money.
Just so you are not a bigot, gallantly trumpeting virtues of open source scope to absolute beginners and other people that doesn't know better, and giving them advice to spend their only hard earned 650 USD on something that is just a promise right now.

OP asked a question to a forum. Is this a good deal for the money and effort ? No it isn't.
At this point it doesn't even exist.  Few days ago they already started extending goals...

So no, if the question is "Is this a good deal?". It's not, not even close. If it exists in a year, and if it works, then, than we will see..

As for Open source hardware, it's you that has it wrong. If it costs a lot it's not free.
It's not Stalin or Hitler that forbids many users to have some piece of T&M equipment.
Mostly it's the price that denies them that "freedom".
So, yeah, as in "free speech" we can talk until next year how great it is that we are "allowed" (free) to be able to get most sophisticated scopes from Keysight, R&S, etc etc...
But because of the price not many people can. They just can't have it, period.

So now we have this thing. It is not even made (it doesn't exist yet), it is as expensive as pro made equipment that does work, it has mediocre specs (does many things but none really well), and those specs are still just wishful thinking because it yet has to verified it really does achieve those specs(or works at all), but it's awesome because they published schematics.

Really?

This is engineering forum. I don't believe in Open Gods (R), or any kind of cults.
All I say is based on facts.
I don't accept "but it is different because Open something....". It's not.
What you do with your own money is your problem.
Giving advice to other people based on your religious/political/activist beliefs is a dick move.
Open Source is and activist/political movement, and not based on real life facts most of the time, apparently.
Whoever wants to do it, good luck, I'm happy for them. But vice versa, people that think differently have a FREEDOM to see things differently.

Best regards,
Sinisa
Thanks for showing me that I've understood you clearly.

Anyway, I only read half of your... and  |O, and then  :palm:. Why bother? You come here talking about politics in an electronics forum. And then you state that if it not free it shouldn't exist (yeah, like you were a dictator, or entitled to be one). I'll just ignore you from now on. Good riddance!

P.S.: If you have read the forum, you could get the idea that someone here has already built the first version of this scope for $239.38 . Your argument doesn't stick (unless all you really want is for someone to buy you all the parts for free - and, of course you do).

Kind regards, Samuel Lourenço
« Last Edit: July 28, 2019, 12:16:21 pm by bloguetronica »
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2112
  • Country: hr
Re: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"
« Reply #54 on: July 28, 2019, 01:41:09 pm »
Thanks for showing me that I've understood you clearly.

Anyway, I only read half of your... and  |O, and then  :palm:. Why bother? You come here talking about politics in an electronics forum. And then you state that if it not free it shouldn't exist (yeah, like you were a dictator, or entitled to be one). I'll just ignore you from now on. Good riddance!

P.S.: If you have read the forum, you could get the idea that someone here has already built the first version of this scope for $239.38 . Your argument doesn't stick (unless all you really want is for someone to buy you all the parts for free - and, of course you do).

Kind regards, Samuel Lourenço

 :-+

Yep, you ARE the face of Open Source mentality...
Listen, really, I'm happy for you or anybody else to do anything you want, provided it doesn't break law and don't screw up other people.

Making things from kit is not new, schematics published with free use clause are nothing new.
But some Heatkit scope made from kit years ago is not to be confused with Tektronix scope from same era. Or then cheap Hameg, that was pro made instrument.
And that scope made from kit was surprisingly useful, and was worth it's (low cost) money.
It's just not to be compared to pro instruments.

But if you call it Open Source, and suddenly you cannot talk about it from a technical merit standpoint.
If it's O.S.H. it doesn't have to be cheap, good or lately even exist for people to start summoning on squares and sing songs of salvation by O.S.H.

C'mon.

From the bottom of my heart, I wish you to do with your life whatever you please. But if your thing is to dress as Mickey Mouse and go to office like that, you have a right to do so. Just keep in mind that other people also have their right to have a good laugh when they see you.
That applies both to you and me.

So let me repeat what I said before and you (conveniently? ) didn't see: OP said that he has limited money and asked would this be a good deal as scope, generator and such. He wanted to buy assembled board because soldering BGA-s by hand is daunting task and requires equipment. Answer to that is no, it is not a good deal, to the point it doesn't exist yet. Repeating it's O.S.H. doesn't change anything regarding initial question.

I also said (also was overseen) that if someone will go with it for O.S.H. reasons, as a learning experience and fully aware the costs (money and time) than it would be great..
I said it was nice project and complimented authors..

And as I said, when(if) they ship and someone actually tries to use it, and it proves to be good then it will be triumf of Open Source Hardware. I really wish they succeed.
We'll see.

But I don't plan to support them with my money or time. I see no benefit. My opinion and decision.
If you do you should, and everybody else based on informed decision. Your and everybody else opinion and decision.
Hell, I wish I was the only person that doesn't support them, so they can be successful..

Have a good day,

Sinisa
 
 

Offline bloguetronica

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 354
  • Country: pt
Re: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"
« Reply #55 on: July 28, 2019, 03:52:35 pm »
To all who might concern.

I do not represent OSH in anyway. In fact, I'm burned out of being in the giving side, without merit, recognition, or money. So, now instead of just doing electronic projects for a hobby, I'm also participating in commercial projects. And perhaps I'll drop the towel on the former (because I'm tired of forumistas here wanting stuff from me, for free, and then suggesting that I could shave a line from the BOM or source inferior, dodgy components - you can read discussions regarding this from years ago).

In fact, I have less motivation to give to the OSH, and I find it more motivating to do projects that get me money.

So, I have two choices:
- Continue with OSH projects that are complex, challenging, that I like to do for fun, spending money on quality components and without receiving any merit, or...
- Give priority to my paid, commercial and easy to do (almost trivial) designs, as a freelancer.

Of course, I'll take the second choice any day, without blinking. I do OSH projects just for fun. Releasing them to the public is not a priority at all (I release then whenever I feel like, delayed and all - the same goes to my videos on YouTube). I don't give much of a crap. That is what ungrateful people and freeloaders can expect of me. Like it or not, I don't care.

And that is why I'm grateful to whoever created this oscilloscope. Because I know how hard it is to design the software and hardware, and because the creator now has to face the judgement of ungrateful bastards.

Kind regards, Samuel Lourenço
« Last Edit: July 28, 2019, 04:02:16 pm by bloguetronica »
 
The following users thanked this post: daveatol, 2N3055

Offline nigelwright7557

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 126
  • Country: gb
    • Murton-Pike Systems
Re: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"
« Reply #56 on: July 28, 2019, 09:41:49 pm »
Thanks for reminder. Luckily for the open source community your worldview even as continue to be a prevalent is not the one and only.

My compliments to David and Dejan for doing a great job. This project is a great contribution to people who is willing to learn something about T&M solutions and push boundaries of DIY/makers solutions to the next level. I do believe that forthcoming crowdfunding campaign will be successful. For other, possibly some company from your neighborhood will start to clone it massively and push the price down. We'll see, that could be a great sign that Scopefun is recognized and attractive and can give Scopefun team a good reason to move it forward.

Making one off will never compete with a manufacturer making hundreds or thousands.
Its easier and better to buy something pro made and designed and has been out there a while to get rid of the bugs and get some cred.
PCBCAD51 PCB design software https://www.murtonpikesystems.co.uk
 

Offline excitedbox

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 50
  • Country: de
Re: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"
« Reply #57 on: August 01, 2019, 12:21:17 am »
1. This thing is waay too expensive for what it offers. You can almost buy a MSO5000 and unlock it to a +$3000 scope for that price.
2. If Volunteers are paid they are not volunteers.
3. Open Source does mean free as in free beer recipe. It means you give all the designs and code for free. Yes you can charge for hardware and assembly for a finished device that you ship and you SHOULD EARN A PROFIT ON THAT but it needs to be reasonable.

If the parts are around 200 (for low volume) and assembly brings it up to 250 then you can charge 300 MAYBE. At that price though your scope is already being beat out by several other USB scopes. That is why you should be looking at making 500-1000 at once and get YOUR COST down to increase your margins.

I like the project and have seen it several times but the price is WAY out of what is reasonable for what you offer. You are trying to pull the same profit margins as rigol and keysight but they offer Gs/s. Calling it Open Source will just get you backlash from the community at that point.

Open Source Projects are meant to change the status quo not finance your start up. We don´t need more of the same as what the industry delivers with worse features and bug riddled, unproven projects that disappear because the developers are in it for the wrong reasons.

I actually came here tonight to post asking why there are no good open source alternatives since the parts are not what make scopes expensive. It is the software and upgrade options being tacked on. We have tons of huge open source software projects so it should be possible to get the price down by doing the same with oscilloscopes.


PS. ANYONE can solder BGA with a toaster oven and a stop watch. Some of my first soldering projects I soldered LGA chips.

I would buy a Rigol DSO1052 and DSLogic add in a $80 kkmoon signal generator and be under 450 and beat every feature of your scope 2-4 fold.

EDIT: People who have built them themselves are saying they paid 90-120 for the parts. That makes it even more of a cash grab. That would mean a nice 60k profit on a 100 units. Laughable what these guys are doing and calling it open source. Same as that other 600 "Open Source" scope that sells you every option extra and only open sources an absolute basic scope firmware.
« Last Edit: August 01, 2019, 12:47:38 am by excitedbox »
 

Offline nigelwright7557

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 126
  • Country: gb
    • Murton-Pike Systems
Re: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"
« Reply #58 on: August 01, 2019, 01:02:31 am »
I use a £10 usb scope off ebay and a £25 second hand sig gen.
Had them both for about many years !
$700 really ?

PCBCAD51 PCB design software https://www.murtonpikesystems.co.uk
 

Offline coromonadalix

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2065
  • Country: ca
Re: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"
« Reply #59 on: August 02, 2019, 05:35:57 am »
I think the OP  has all the answers now ... it should stop here.
 

Offline Marco

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4415
  • Country: nl
Re: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"
« Reply #60 on: August 02, 2019, 03:56:05 pm »
Somehow I think people are just trolling now :/
 
The following users thanked this post: prasimix, bloguetronica

Offline bloguetronica

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 354
  • Country: pt
Re: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"
« Reply #61 on: August 02, 2019, 05:19:48 pm »
Yes, they are. I see statements like, "OSH is/should be free as in free beer". But the OSHWA definition tells a completely different story:
https://www.oshwa.org/definition/

Anyway, good scope, bad scope, recommend, don't recommend... That is the subject here. I already left my opinion.

Kind regards, Samuel Lourenço
 

Offline ratatax

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 62
  • Country: fr
Re: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"
« Reply #62 on: August 08, 2019, 03:01:43 pm »
Well I haven't read all this thread but I think usually open source projects are for people that like to get hands dirty, people who wants to contribute to the project or are interested into designing their own scope.

For end users that just want the best scope for the best price, it's not a good idea.

 

Offline ratatax

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 62
  • Country: fr
Re: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"
« Reply #63 on: August 08, 2019, 03:15:22 pm »

If the parts are around 200 (for low volume) and assembly brings it up to 250 then you can charge 300 MAYBE.

That's totally unrealistic. If you already designed a product, you probably know that something with a $200 BOM cost is more likely to cost $1000 than $300...
 
The following users thanked this post: prasimix, bloguetronica

Online taydin

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 457
  • Country: tr
Re: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"
« Reply #64 on: August 08, 2019, 03:46:37 pm »
If you want to build this scope from components, chances are something won't work, and you will need a scope to troubleshoot. So if you don't have a scope and are building this from components just to HAVE A SCOPE, you are taking a big risk. Chances are very high that something won't work, nobody is so lucky that a hardware at this level of complexity will "just work".

So, this ScopeFun only makes sense for educational purposes. You will build a fairly complex circuit from scratch, you will encounter issues, fix them and learn a lot. Or you will buy it ready built, and write new software or new FPGA code for it, and learn a lot.

But is it a good deal to be a beginner's first scope? Nope.
Real programmers use machine code!

My hobby projects http://mekatronik.org/forum
 
The following users thanked this post: 2N3055

Offline bloguetronica

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 354
  • Country: pt
Re: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"
« Reply #65 on: August 08, 2019, 10:53:30 pm »

If the parts are around 200 (for low volume) and assembly brings it up to 250 then you can charge 300 MAYBE.

That's totally unrealistic. If you already designed a product, you probably know that something with a $200 BOM cost is more likely to cost $1000 than $300...
Yup, I agree. Unfortunately, many people nowadays don't value someone else's work, and often expect things for free.

Kind regards, Samuel Lourenço
 

Online james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9537
  • Country: us
Re: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"
« Reply #66 on: August 08, 2019, 11:31:33 pm »
The issue there is we can buy hardware from China all day long at absurdly low margins so that creates an expectation for that sort of prices.

Expensive botique stuff has its place but the market is tiny. It's easier to do with things that are "artistic" or audiophool gear.

I mean can anyone here honestly say they'd fork out $700 for an open source project like this when they could get something offering superior performance for much less?
 

Offline excitedbox

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 50
  • Country: de
Re: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"
« Reply #67 on: August 11, 2019, 03:06:54 pm »
That is why China is wiping the floor with the US, greed. If you need to do work once and can sell it millions of times then you cans sell it for 300 and still make a ton of money. Taking the raspberry pi for example which has sold 10 million+ units would have made the designers a good amount of money with very slim margins. Obviously a scope isn´t going to sell nearly as many so the margins need to be bigger. Even if the designers only get 25 cents for each pi sold their hourly rate would be insane. Look at BOM of the pi and other projects none of them are near 500% profit margins.

If you can sell the scope for $300 and sell 100X as many you will make more money than selling a coupe hundred to a small enthusiast crowd for 1000. In addition economies of scale kicks in and your BOM cost goes down by about half going from 100 to 1000s so now you are not making 100 profit but 200. Even if you spent 10,000 hours developing this thing or about 6 people working full time for a year would each be making $20 an hour with those margins. Selling 5000 takes that profit to $100 an hour each. Obviously there are also other costs involved but a decent scope will also sell a ton more than 5000 units especially in the budget price range.

Also calling them volunteers while collecting 500% profit margins is an insult.

My biggest problem is that the OP is almost certainly related to the project and not really asking for advice. It looks like a thinly veiled attempt at getting eyes on this project. Certainly would be how I would go about it and I have done that with websites I made to get the first few users to look at it.
 

Offline Marco

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4415
  • Country: nl
Re: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"
« Reply #68 on: August 11, 2019, 09:31:29 pm »
They sell it with no warranty or support ... a project like say Red Pitaya has far more support than pretty much anything out of China. Also it's able to sell the hardware at quite a large markup, most of which is actually necessary.

I find it impossible to believe that with something like Red Pitaya already out there and having long term success that people are honestly quibling over the bit of margin here. There is a market out there for these kinds of projects and the people working on them would like to earn a bit of their initial time investment back on the first batch.
« Last Edit: August 11, 2019, 09:34:57 pm by Marco »
 

Online maginnovision

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1208
  • Country: us
Re: Open-source digital oscilloscope "ScopeFun"
« Reply #69 on: August 28, 2019, 05:38:14 pm »
For the price it's a hard pass for me. I'd get an mso5000 first. If I've got 750 to blow on unknown hardware software I've got another 250 to buy from experienced engineers  This thing isolated or not, I didn't see anything about it.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf