Why do you think there aren't more "good" USB oscilloscopes? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: TomKatt
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 11:18:08 am
content: Since modern scopes are basically miniature computers with lcd monitors, why do you think it is there aren't more 'good quality' USB scopes on the market? The only ones I've seen that seem to be as well made as bench scopes are the Pico products (and perhaps something like the NI Virtual Bench that Dave uses)... The majority of the USB scopes seems to be lower quality gear produced by the likes of Owon and Hantek, with quirky software and limited feature sets.I would have thought that it would be rather straightforward to use a front end of bench gear quality in a box with a fast USB3 link... The cost savings of using PC hardware for control and display would surely allow such gear to be price competitive? Plus, with larger screens and perhaps PC memory you could extend some feature sets like digital decoding or waveform comparisons.So why do you think there aren't more USB scopes on the market?

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 11:26:02 am
content: because why do you want to use a computer with the oscilloscope? Oscilloscope is kind of a important tool that needs to be convenient in the lab, portable, reliable, durable etc. And having to depend on two boxes, rather then one box, is bad. Having to deal with the company network for laboratory stuff is bad. All the network/OS stuff is a pain in the ass.Its good to press one button and be able to get measurements. The whole data logging, waveform comparison, etc.. its kind of a different tool. You would do that kind of work in a office environment. Also, working on data analysis, in the lab, sucks. If you are forced to do that, it means your work plan sucks. It means using a lab bench in a ESD environment to do analysis/bureaucracy. It sounds like a plot to get rid of someones office. Like if you work with data analysis for real commerical purposes you basically have a chain you need to follow. Gather data. Verify that the data is reasonable/good, then perform analysis. Then another analyst might perform analysis, then a manager will write a top level report after more analysis. A different person might conduct each job really, because hard core stats wizards, they are not trained to use oscilloscopes safely and stuff like that.It's lumping stuff together to make something crazy IMO, as soon as you have a group environment, and tons of liability.

author: TomKatt
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 11:31:44 am
content: Quote from: coppercone2 on February 16, 2023, 11:26:02 amI certainly get how many measurements are made that just require a quick probe and a glance at the screen. But many times you might want to review longer history (even if it's limited to the rolling waveform on the screen) that can be offered by a pc.Also, with a USB scope you could offer similar performance at reduced prices because you are making use of hardware you already have.Finally, although nowhere near as mobile as a handheld, at least you'd have the option to use it off the bench (ie automotive).

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 11:32:39 am
content: Honestly that kind of measurements your asking for is like a special project unless you work in some sweat shop. It's like not normal work. Have a tech do that stuff while in the lab and you will get errors and mistakes, its OFFICE work to do that. If you want real success do the data gathering in the morning and then the analysis after lunch and a coffee. And most managers will have different people do the tasks.

author: TomKatt
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 11:33:42 am
content: Quote from: coppercone2 on February 16, 2023, 11:26:02 amRemember too that not all bench scope are used in lab environments... What about the hobby or 'prosumer' applications?Why not make Rigol / Siglent class products in USB form factor?Edit - also, pc based analyisis seems to already be in the lab... I've used gas spectrum analyzers etc that rely on a pc for operation. So perhaps it's a different field, but the foundation is there.

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 11:36:19 am
content: Quote from: TomKatt on February 16, 2023, 11:33:42 amWell that market is small. If you have a small market you don't get the trust required. Do you want to trust a random company? In business... its all about heritage, confidence, etc. You can start all these companies up, but once you do this for a few years, in industry, no one believes that any job is basically easy/trivial, besides project ruiners. Meaning you have a bunch of unvetted options as a prosumer, but you wanna be able to interact with the big boys, trust you follow standards, etc... which means you get the same equipment they do.Super hard to verify all that stuff is accurate. Picoscope managed to exist, but more?ANd of course there is the network risk that is emerging. Rates of security related network problems are skyrocketing. Do you know what it means for a company to have office liability vs R&D/Quality liability linked to computers?!And lets say a business is being acquired or something. Have too many.... cost favorable choices... and you end up with many problems. Like the interoperability is poor.

author: TomKatt
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 11:42:05 am
content: Quote from: coppercone2 on February 16, 2023, 11:36:19 amOK - it's hard to argue that pointThis is why I asked - it seemed silly, but I obviously don't appreciate the professional aspects of the issueedit - I've worked in analytical QC labs at manufacturing plants, and the majority of our higher end gear was all pc based in one form or another.

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 11:42:36 am
content: well the fact is your job is probobly 3 people or more in a company (making a widget). And there exist environments where that is not true of course, but its hard/stressful.. because most of the time, there is constant work. Like imaging someone accepting the fact that they need a secretary, until you are there.. it seems ludicrous. Day 1 you think its totally nuts. Year 2 you think that you need more people. Like starship troopersoccasionally you run into a delirious superman running around corporate that does everything till they collapse some where.

author: David Aurora
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 11:46:47 am
content: Quote from: coppercone2 on February 16, 2023, 11:26:02 amFor about a million reasons. I've got both CROs and DSOs in my shop and I'm still constantly lusting after a good USB oscilloscope (I have an Analog Discovery 2 which sort of fits the bill, except it doesn't have proper probe inputs, and I've owned/returned a Picoscope that let me down, although they've just told me they've shipped me one to trial based on some previous discussions I've had with them so I'm hopeful it no longer sucks with the new software they just dropped).The main reason for me is callouts- I've spent years lugging scopes out to jobs, and it sucks. They're bulky, they're fragile and they're expensive. A laptop is 2 of those things, sure, but I have a tough briefcase for it so that negates those issues. Would I rather use one of my Tektronix CROs? For sure, at my desk. Not so much when it means removing it from the bench and lugging to a site though.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 notjustscopes. 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.

author: TomKatt
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 11:51:39 am
content: Quote from: David Aurora on February 16, 2023, 11:46:47 amYou stated my questions better than I did.The whole scope world isn't limited to bench use.

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 12:00:48 pm
content: well then you have the scope meter to compete with there. I think companies are going to just put more features into scope meters, which they already are.But the question was why are there not a ton of these, rather then should they exist.

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 12:08:47 pm
content: For personal use the market is small. For corporate use your computer oscilloscope will be subject to all of the IT scruteny, compliance requirements, security patches, password management, antivirus, encryption, backup, etc.

author: pcprogrammer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 12:12:15 pm
content: A modern DSO is not bulky. Take the Rigol MSO5000, it takes less space then a laptop and a USB scope like the pico, owon or hantek ones. Some of the Chinese crap scopes are almost the size of, or even smaller then, a USB scope.But I guess it is based on demand. Probably less demand for an USB based scope then for the standard bench top scopes.A draw back with USB scopes is the connection with the computer. It can introduce noise and problems with ground. Sure with a laptop the latter can be avoided, but for the noise it still might need some insulation scheme between the computer and the USB scope. That adds more cost to the scope.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 12:19:33 pm
content: Quote from: TomKatt on February 16, 2023, 11:18:08 amBecause people expect cheap, which is what the chinese ones deliver. But cheap means you don't have any money left for a decent software development team.Look at the Digilent Analog Discovery 2 for example, there is basically nothing in the hardware yet it's US$400, the same price as a great and vastly more capable in many respects 4CH USB bench scope. Why? Because the software and support is awesome and you pay a premium for that.And then as PCprogrammer said above, the market is smaller because most people prefer "the right tool for the job" which in the majority of cases is a dedicated bench scope. Just like a multimeter beats a USB multimeter in usability any day of the week.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 12:20:55 pm
content: Quote from: TomKatt on February 16, 2023, 11:18:08 amcurrent offerings satisfy demand

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 12:26:52 pm
content: Quote from: David Aurora on February 16, 2023, 11:46:47 amCleverscope?or Keysight?https://www.keysight.com/au/en/products/modular/usb-products/usb-economy-oscilloscopes-and-digitizers.htmlAnd didn't Siglent or Rigol just release a modular scope?

author: TomKatt
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 12:33:53 pm
content: All very intriguing and valid points. I had forgotten about the IT requirements for mobile devices in today's modern world, which are rather substantial.I guess I got hung up on the usefulness of such a device and the features they could provide, but obviously the market for these appears to be quite small and I guess that's why Pico etc have their niche for professionals. Anything lower is just likely to be crap because the software for these things is likely over half the budget as Dave pointed out... In bench scopes, the software budget can be spread out over a larger market share.So, today I learned something new

author: David Aurora
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 12:44:49 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on February 16, 2023, 12:26:52 pmAs far as I can tell it's all Windows software?Which, yeah... at the risk of starting yet another Mac vs PC thing, I'd rather be beaten senseless with my own shoes than deal with that shit on a daily basis. I switch back and forth sometimes to use my CNC machine and that's more than enough frustration for me, I honestly couldn't imagine having to use that OS to do real work on a daily basis

author: TomKatt
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 12:54:04 pm
content: I should have also thought about longevity... We already have automated equipment running on obsolete Windows operating systems that require physical segregation on our network. Not to mention servicing equipment with software you sometimes cannot locate any longer.You can power up a tube based Tek scope from the 1960's and it will likely work like it did when it was new, but I've had to replace equipment just 15 years old because it wouldn't play nice with modern pc's.Edit - what made me appreciate USB scopes were the way Ivan from Pine Hollow Automotive uses his Pico for automotive troubleshooting... The Pico software seems very intuitive and he's able to scroll through extended timeframes of signals to locate trouble or decode CAN data... But I guess that is an example of a niche use case and there wouldn't be a huge market for competitors to Pico...

author: dmills
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 01:25:51 pm
content: Most of the cost of a full up modern scope is still there in a USB version if you want the same capability.I mean you have the same front end, same data acquisition, same TRIGGER logic, same acquisition memory, and this is where the cost is, not 'put a screen on it or don't'. Trigger in particular is not something that you can really do in software, because that is inherently after the fact.In the USB case you have some fairly non trivial software to write that has to run on a poorly defined PC with a number of different OS options, and with MS pushing updates....With the PC in the box, you control the OS/Hardware/Display and all the rest, it makes your software test requirements way easier.Doing it really right needs a LOT of the functionality in the USB connected box, not in the PC, so you have a reasonably fun HDL project to make that side work, which is non trivial.About the only thing the PC really makes easier is graphics rendering, and possibly some post processing.A "USB scope" is something that has a certain reputation in the marketplace for being a bit of a poor option, so you also have an uphill marketing fight to convince people that your thing is as good as that R&S/Agilent/Tek. Having used Picoscopes for various things, I would not remotely consider them a substitute for either my R&S or my 465B.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 01:39:32 pm
content: I had a different idea on how to improve the scope, and that is instead of having a built in screen, have a HDMI output to connect an off the shelf monitor to it. It would certainly help a lot in regards to limited screen real estate on mixed signal scopes.

author: TomKatt
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 03:28:50 pm
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on February 16, 2023, 01:39:32 pmMany scopes already include some kind of video out, but the problem is that only duplicates what the built-in screen is displaying so the benefit is limited to making things larger - you don't get any more usable real estate out of that option. Remote web interfaces are similar with the added benefit of being able to manipulate the control settings.It's too bad there isn't an easy way to upgrade the memory in bench scopes using something like laptop ram modules... I'm sure DDR3-4 would be too slow for zooming in as the built-in memory serves, but it might be handy to be able to record long waveforms even if the recording was limited to the display points on the screen... And if using a laptop doesn't make a lot of sense, perhaps the other way around and offer usb mouse / keyboard functionality to the scope to manipulate some more complicated tasks?

author: Alex Eisenhut
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 04:10:49 pm
content: Quote from: TomKatt on February 16, 2023, 12:54:04 pmYeah wake me up when I can heat my place with a USB scope!

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 04:34:45 pm
content: Pukka scopes are all-in-one boxes you can just drop on a bench and use. Mains connector and that's it. USB scopes are at least two modules with interconnecting cable(s), so not quite as convenient. A PC-based scope would really need to be a tablet to get the same convenience, and you could strap the USB box to the back of that, shove it all in an enclosure and have traditional scope.The PC scope, I would have thought, suffers from the USB connection. USB3 isn't that recent and most USB scopes use USB2 because that's what PCs had. A pukka scope could have a PCI connection (or even a custom one), so maybe now we might see not-a-USB scopes using a PCIe card or similar.Also, the PC suffers from being anonymous. The scope designer has not control, nor idea, of what is going to be running his software or driving his hardware. Maybe some W10 update does something below the water line and it's not the developer getting the stick for his faultless kit getting the blame.So far as there not being a market, you could say there is no market for $20 20Gb/s scopes, simply because you can't get 'em. So until and unless there are many almost-expensive but great USB scopes, the market will likely be small and the attraction to develop them (and maybe make a better market) similarly small.And... a PC ain't going to have knobs to twiddle. I like my Micsig, but I think I would be much happier with the version that has physical knobs.

author: pcprogrammer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 04:42:36 pm
content: Quote from: TomKatt on February 16, 2023, 03:28:50 pmMy 16 year old Yokogawa DL9705 offers this functionality.

author: fourfathom
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 04:43:06 pm
content: 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.

author: Aleksorsist
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 04:51:21 pm
content: 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.

author: hans
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 05:54:57 pm
content: Quote from: David Aurora on February 16, 2023, 11:46:47 amI 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.

author: Gyro
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 06:03:22 pm
content: 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?

author: TomKatt
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 06:13:05 pm
content: Quote from: Gyro on February 16, 2023, 06:03:22 pmA smart watch has almost as much vertical resolution and nearly half the horizontal than many of these 'big' 7" screens with 800x480 pixels

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 08:37:03 pm
content: Quote from: hans on February 16, 2023, 05:54:57 pmMany bench scopes have HDMI output these days.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 09:11:43 pm
content: Define "good". In terms of hardware specs, the higher-end Picoscope series certainly is pretty good and rivals or exceeds many standalone oscilloscopes (like the 5000/6000 series.)They are not cheap though.In terms of UI, that's a very personal point. Many of us still find standalone oscilloscopes more usable in terms of UI, at least for "normal", bench work. OTOH, USB oscilloscopes allow stuff that is clunky on standalone ones, so really depends on your workflow and needs.Now again, if you equate "good" with great hardware specs and low cost, you'll be out of luck.The decent or good USB oscilloscopes will usually be more expensive than the low-end standalone ones from Rigol or the "low-cost" brands such as Owon and such, but they'll usually have more sample memory.

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 09:32:06 pm
content: Quote from: TomKatt on February 16, 2023, 11:18:08 amThe fastest USB3 links aren't even remotely close to matching the internal data transfer rates in an oscilloscope. You can remote the display and control interface, but if you offload the actual captures to the PC for processing, it won't happen as quickly. This is a limitation of PicoScopes, although not a problem in most cases. You simply can't dump data at the full capture rate to the PC memory, you have to make a capture and then wait for it to be transmitted.It can be done, sort of. There are PicoScopes and then there are high-end headless DSOs that are not all-in-a-box solutions. However, I think the one-box design is probably the most efficient for normal workbenches. Many of these have external video, remote interfaces and PC data transfer capability as well.

author: David Aurora
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 09:57:33 pm
content: Has anyone here gotten some time on one of these yet?https://digilent.com/shop/analog-discovery-pro-3000-series-portable-high-resolution-mixed-signal-oscilloscopes/I'd be really keen to see what they're like given how much I already like their software with my AD2

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 10:40:28 pm
content: Quote from: David Aurora on February 16, 2023, 09:57:33 pmThe obvious limitation here is the lack of a proper analog front end, it's just a single fixed voltage range. Sure it's got 14bit, but it ain't in the same class a bench scope. And only 100MS/sDoes look very nice though if you have specific needs.Is it the same software?

author: thm_w
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 10:45:39 pm
content: Good low end option is dslogic:https://www.dreamsourcelab.com/product/dscope-series/and no its not great value for money, likely due to the mentioned reason of low market volume. Could a major brand come out with a killer value USB scope? yeah. Would they ever do it? Probably not.Quote from: David Aurora on February 16, 2023, 09:57:33 pm55MHz bandwidth, and 100MS/s, for $1200. Very very few people on this forum would want something like that. Unless it was for a specific logging task that required 14-bit.

author: Aleksorsist
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 10:53:59 pm
content: 10 gbps USB 3 Gen 2x1 (awful naming aside) would actually be enough to stream the data from any of the 1000 series 8-bit 1GSPS (8gbps) scopes in real time. Go with PCIe through Thunderbolt/USB4 and you get 40 gbps to play with, plus DMA to make storing and processing all that data much easier on the host system.As for what is "good", I'd agree that the 5000 series picoscope is a good USB scope, but it's price point is not remotely close to being competitive with sigilent/rigol. I don't know how much of it is markup versus the BOM cost for it being high, but it very likely uses the hmcad1520 which isn't really that expensive for what it is.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 12:08:48 am
content: Tek 5 and 6 series low profilehttps://www.tek.com/en/products/oscilloscopes/high-speed-digitizers/5-series-mso-low-profilehttps://www.tek.com/en/products/oscilloscopes/high-speed-digitizers/6-series-mso-low-profileSiglent SDS6000Lhttps://siglentna.com/digital-oscilloscopes/sds6000l-low-profile-digital-storage-oscilloscope/Rigol DS8000-Rhttps://www.rigol.eu/products/oscillosopes/DS8000.htmlKeysight U270xA or P924xAhttps://www.keysight.com/zz/en/product/U2702A/usb-modular-oscilloscope-200mhz.htmlhttps://www.keysight.com/zz/en/product/P9243A/streamline-series-usb-oscilloscope-1-ghz.htmlthats before PXI PCI or LXI chassis, which have even more options....Most of the majors have USB scopes.Quote from: TomKatt on February 16, 2023, 11:18:08 amBecause there isn't the demand you imagine there to be.

author: David Aurora
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 12:24:25 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on February 16, 2023, 10:40:28 pmReally? I hadn't looked deep enough to catch that, bummerYeah same softwareI wonder if they'll be adding anything else to the range in the near future. They do seem super active on the software side of things

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 12:29:03 am
content: Quote from: Someone on February 17, 2023, 12:08:48 amIs hardly a USB scope.Instead it's a remote acquisition system with 4 or 8 channels and multiple units can be remotely linked and synced for up to 512 channels.It might look like a USB scope but that's all as you connect a keyboard, mouse, mains and a display to it however it can also mimic a USB scope in that you can use a PC to drive it like any scope with webserver capability.https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds6000l-2ghz-12bit-8-ch-(china-only)/

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 12:46:57 am
content: Quote from: tautech on February 17, 2023, 12:29:03 amThat's the kind of thing you get when you are running some large scale scientific experiemnt to collect huge numbers of channels of data. Quite niche.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 02:03:25 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on February 17, 2023, 12:46:57 amOr production monitoring/control applications.That they can be scattered about linked by LAN and also synced with the purpose built SYNC64 module and able to be controlled from a single location makes for a darn powerful system with each 4ch set a headless SDS6000A DSO with all its 5 GSa/s per channel capability but minus a touch display like the scope has.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 02:29:41 am
content: Quote from: tautech on February 17, 2023, 12:29:03 amIs it a scope? Yes.Can it be used from a PC over a standard computer interface? Yes (only on ethernet? no IP serving over USB?).Sure seems to be what the OP was asking about:Quote from: TomKatt on February 16, 2023, 11:18:08 amQuote from: tautech on February 17, 2023, 12:29:03 amYep so it can be a computer connected scope, with the same front end and processing of its "fully equipped" version. Exactly what the OP was asking about!

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 03:48:25 am
content: USB scopes are a really niche market item. The computer side with the display and whatnot is so cheap these days that there is very little saved in going with the USB form factor that requires you to drag around a computer and deal with cumbersome controls. For around the same price you can get a standalone instrument. I've used USB TE before and have never been impressed, it's less convenient and offers few advantages. Back in the day the promise was cheaper gear by not having to duplicate the processor and display and such but it never really lived up to that promise IMO.

author: David Aurora
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 03:58:43 am
content: Quote from: james_s on February 17, 2023, 03:48:25 amSpeaking for myself, it's not that I'm trying to save a few measly dollars on the screen or power supply or whatever. It's that when I'm called out to a job I already have my laptop with me with a nice big screen and the necessary processing power to run a scope/sig gen/etc, as well as a few bags of tools and test leads and stuff. Carrying less gear helps, especially when parking sucks, there are a million stairs or it's a dodgy area. And it's not just that it saves lugging one scope- it also saves me needing to lug a signal generator, and also an isolation transformer in some cases. Which also means I don't need a power board, extension cables, etc... It all adds up.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 04:27:46 am
content: Well there are niche uses like yours, but I don't think most scope users are in that situation. Personally I find a compact standalone scope more convenient.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 08:01:42 am
content: Quote from: David Aurora on February 17, 2023, 03:58:43 amSmall tablet scope?Not a huge amount bigger than a USB scope box and more convenient.The problem is as others have said, the market for such things is not big. It seems to be either ultra-cheap (Hantek/Owon etc), educational (Analog Discovery), niche like Cleverscope, or pro level modular stuff like Keysigt and others do. Or even the Scopemeter type devices.You seen to want say a screenless scope equivlent to say a $400 Rigol/Siglent type scope. What's wrong with a Picoscope, isn't that what you want?

author: peter-h
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 08:10:25 am
content: From the commercial POV, a USB scope implies "cheap" and the mfg is not able to make a lot of money on it.Also you need a laptop, and laptops are going out of fashion.More and more people run their entire life on a phone, which is why those of us who can read and write struggle so much with communicating with so many illiterate peopleSome use a tablet, which in general doesn't do USB usefully; Apple ones are well crippled like everything from Apple, and while Android are better you still get very limited USB operation. And you get huge OS version dependencies so a USB scope may have a limited life because pretty soon the tablet which works with it exists only on ebay. I use USB endoscopes (borescopes, in aviation) which tend to be chinese made and getting them to work on a particular phone is OK for a year or two... One borescope is now "fixed" to a specific Samsung phone which lives with it in the same box, and I am sure that in a few years that $300 borescope will go in the bin because that phone will die. Tablets are also going out of fashion, with little or no performance development especially in the android sphere. Also, as I well know from aviation use, all modern tablets suffer badly from overheating... get direct sunlight on it and the internal sensor shuts it down at about +45C especially if the charger is connected, and in a DSO usage you will need constant external power. So you have to buy one of those holders which has fans built into it.Also nobody wants to compete with the chinese; they always pick the low hanging fruit and destroy the market for everybody in the West. The smart thing is to go upmarket. DSOs exploded with cheap 1gsps ADCs which I think are down to $5 now and everybody and their dog in china is churning out DSOs with those ADCs, and if you want to make a DSO with say 5-10gsps then you are spending real money on the ADCs and on other hardware, and making it USB-only just tells potential customers that you are "cheap".Also a dedicated self contained box is nice to use. I have a Lecroy 3034 here and while the OS is sh*it and slow as a pig, the whole package, with nice knobs, is quite good. I can even access it over RDP (remote desktop) or the LC application can run over a VPN (poorly but usably). That scope was about 5k and it will work for many years. Well... it blew up after 1 year and got fixed under warranty but has been ok since; I leave it running 24/7

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 08:42:36 am
content: Quote from: peter-h on February 17, 2023, 08:10:25 amOh, an early SDS3000 rebrand. Yes they were treacle slow according to complaints but the one I briefly used at Siglent HQ in 2014 seemed fine.The latest version SDS3000X with a Xilinx processor upgrade is apparently much better but like the SDS3000 models only available to the west as a LeCroy.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 08:48:42 am
content: Quote from: Gyro on February 16, 2023, 06:03:22 pmIt could be, especially since producing the display for a higher resolution and depth screen would lower the peak number of acquisitions per second. Which sounds better for marketing, 40,000 acquisitions per second or 10,000 with a higher definition screen that looks practically the same?

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 08:49:14 am
content: Quote from: james_s on February 17, 2023, 04:27:46 amIt really depends what you do.If you only repair stuff, never develop new things that require lots of documentation, never do post analysis of data etc, then a standalone scope is simplest thing to use, sure. Switch on, poke around with probe looking at the screen, fix this and that, try again and done...LeCroy and Keysight have a PC application that you run on your PC that is version of scope application from their PC based scopes for that same purpose..Maybe not a mainstream use, but definitely not such a niche...When you have a scope application open on your PC together with editor, Octave, some datasheets etc and can copy, paste, save etc at the same time without any problems, it helps a lot.And, also, if you do the post analysis, data transfer rates are MUCH faster from a propper USB scope than any of the SCPI combinations I ever tried...

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 08:51:06 am
content: Quote from: David Hess on February 17, 2023, 08:48:42 amThis..Once you go over certain DPI, there is no benefit to visibility but a huge problem with much more processing....

author: David Aurora
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 09:05:51 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on February 17, 2023, 08:01:42 amYeah but again, the point is not lugging yet another bit of gear when there's already a laptop with me. The tablet thing is weird because yeah, they're small, but they also aren't going to have the same capabilities as a USB one, so it becomes another game of what else you need to bring to round things out. I've definitely considered it though, and may still get one at some point. That said, I've already got a DSO that's probably not much bigger than a tablet scope if we're gonna play the "not much bigger than..." game, but then we're back to square one with a signal generator and isolation transformer and so on.Going for super high end doesn't make sense in my case either because I have real gear at the workshop- for me (and likely others) it's more about having an electronics Swiss army knife. I literally always carry a Leatherman for day to day quick fixes, this is like that. I just want something with enough basic tools to get me out of a jam on site, if deeper analysis is required then I can take repairs back to work or come in with more gear and parts. A good example of how this works for me would be a job a few weeks ago- a large format (as in it needs to be moved in pieces by truck) mixing console installation/restoration in a studio. The deep repairs get done back at the shop, but having the AD2 and laptop with me was perfect for sweeping through the patchbay checking for signals, tracing bad connections, verifying operation of individual sections and so on. I could easily switch windows to update my notes, check the schematic, save reference waveforms for channel comparisons and even play music for listening tests, all from the one place. The catch of course being the horrendous probe adaptor (although I literally just made myself a better one today that plugs straight in and gets rid of the short risk, plus compensates better)The sell with the stuff like Picoscopes is that I could literally throw it and a pair of probes in my existing laptop case with the laptop and I'm set. It's fantastic in theory and DOES fill this gap... in theory. In practice, when I tried one the software was fucking atrocious and completely unusable for real work and got sent back immediately. But as I mentioned earlier in this thread, I'm told they've shipped a loaner out to me to try out the new, finished version 7 software so my fingers and toes are crossed that it delivers. If it does, great, I'll buy one. If it doesn't I'll resume wishing for Diligent to release something that fits the bill, because for me their software is perfect.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 10:13:25 am
content: Quote from: David Hess on February 17, 2023, 08:48:42 amAre you sure? There is no way a display is updating at 40,000Hz. And if it did you wouldn't notice any difference between that and 10,000Hz.The display is surely decoupled from the acquisition and merely shows a snapshot of the acquisition buffer every screen update (at 30~120Hz). A larger screen may well require more CPU oomph but will that be taken from the waveform capture hardware? Don't they use DMA anymore?Are we, perhaps, being confused and misled by these numbers?

author: peter-h
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 11:05:23 am
content: QuoteThose apps are very slow. You are looking at update rates like 1 second - even over 100mbps/1gps ethernet. Poorly written? Sure! Look pretty though and handy for screenshots for posting on EEVBLOG

author: TomKatt
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 11:15:30 am
content: Quote from: bdunham7 on February 16, 2023, 09:32:06 pmI agree the triggering and processing has to be done at the hardware level. I guess what I'm thinking of is more the ability to manipulate the captured information, whether that be longer signal time analysis or improving the MSO LA capabilities by going beyond analysis of what is stored on a single screen capture.I see now that the 'computer side' of stand alone devices (screen etc) are likely commodity items and there is likely not much of an economic advantage to eliminating those elements and using laptop gear instead.So, it all comes down to mobility and additional analysis I guess. To that end, a tablet-like more pc oriented device would serve equally well... It wouldn't necessarily need to be USB / laptop. So it becomes more of a niche market product, explaining why I guess there aren't more 'good' ones.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 11:16:26 am
content: Quote from: PlainName on February 17, 2023, 10:13:25 amIt doesn't have to. Each display frame contains the acquisitions –– to simplify, one curve per acquisition –– since the last display update.At 75 Hz update rate, 40k acquisitions per second would be about 533 acquisitions per frame, or 533 curves of the sampled data per frame.At 10k acquisitions per second, it'd be 133 curves of the sampled data per frame. Is that visible? I dunno, not enough practical experience to say.Quote from: peter-h on February 17, 2023, 11:05:23 amIt is extremely difficult to make good products that cross niches. Here, the problem is that as a product, you need software running on arbitrary random machines efficiently, and you need hardware that interfaces nicely with random machines, and you need the combination to work well.You essentially need a good hardware team that can provide the sampled data to a well-defined (in advance) interface (USB or Ethernet using TCP or UDP stack), and a software team that is more oriented towards games than typical commercial office programs.To make the combination work well, you need management that can interact effectively with both teams. Do you have any idea how rare such management is?The standard commercial solution (not talking about USB scopes only here, but more generally any similar appliance) seems to be that either one part is bought from a different company, or the software is made by the equivalent of a bunch of high-schoolers; regardless of what the appliance is.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 11:22:12 am
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on February 17, 2023, 11:16:26 amWell, quite. The display rate shouldn't affect the acquisition rate, so having a bigger screen shouldn't mean a reduction of captures from, for instance, 40k/s to 10k/s. Which was the point.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 12:09:10 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on February 17, 2023, 11:22:12 amPoint is that screen with 2x resolution has 4x of pixels and that display engine has to crunch 4x more data for same result.Which means 4x more capable infrastructure for that. Not impossible but not free...

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 12:18:29 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on February 17, 2023, 11:22:12 amOops. I missed the point, as usual. SorryI can understand the reduction of captures if each capture sequence is at most as long as is shown on the screen, but otherwise I'd expect the captured signal (and the acquisition buffer) be wider than the screen.That leads to an interesting question: Should an USB scope always provide the sample sequences, or would it be better if it sometimes returned the combined acquisition buffer instead?There are many forms such a buffer could take, but the simplest form I can think of has 256 8-bit bins per time unit, forming a 256-bin histogram of the acquired curves at that point in time relative to the trigger. The computer could request updates only on a specific section (a screenful), and when paused, request the entire buffer (up to whatever time depth is available), or the data from the latest acquisition. (That assumes an 8-bit ADC, by the way. For an N-bit ADC, I'd expect 2Nsamples per time unit.)Typical data rate could be for example 1920 time units 25 times each second, i.e. 12,288,000 bytes per second.More generally, givenWtime units,Ftimes per second,N-bit ADC, we have W×F×2Nbytes per second at 8-bit bins (up to 255×F acquisitions per second), and 2×W×F×2Nbytes per second for 16-bit bins (up to 65535×F acquisitions per second).While one might think that this contains thedisplayinformation, it is actually just the histogram of the acquisitions; i.e. full information (except order of acquisitions), time-wise limited toWtime units relative to trigger point. It's also quite feasible to implement on any hardware that has the memory bandwidth to store both the latest acquisition and access one entry of the 2N-byte or -word histogram for that time point. Maximum sample depth orWdoes not affect the work needed to be done, assuming double buffering, except for the zeroing of the memory after it has been sent (to prepare for it to be useable as the histogram buffer).

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 12:29:52 pm
content: QuoteIt would be nice if one had the choiceMuch of the time, a snapshot of the acquisition buffer every display update would be fine - we often want a real-time display as we're poking at things and setting up. But sometimes you want a looong capture you can scroll through at your leisure, and the USB scope scores there because it has the entire PC storage resource to play with.

author: jasonRF
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 01:42:03 pm
content: Quote from: JPortici on February 16, 2023, 12:20:55 pmThis. Most professional users want a bench scope (I have never seen a USB scope at work), and when a USB scope is in order there are already enough 'good' options available. There is a pretty big barrier to entry in this market: need to have good hardware, good software, and to chip business away from Picotech need to have either a significantly lower price or some better specs or additional features that people care about.There are companies that are trying to do this, for example TiePiehttps://www.tiepie.com/en/usb-oscilloscope/handyscope-hs6but if you are going to spend that much, do you go with the 'unknown' brand or just go with Pico? Keysight offers a couple of models but they have weird limitations (eg the 1250 point FFT size). They also fit into Keysight card-cages alongside other instruments to make self-contained systems, and I suspect that is what they are really designed for.For the hobby marketQuote from: EEVblog on February 16, 2023, 12:19:33 pmis exactly right. Some of the 'cheap' scopes have good-enough hardware. But the software keeps them far away from being a 'good' scope. The Owon vds6102a multi-resolution scope is a prime example. Some of the cheap scopes are a mediocre mixed-bag for hardware and software - the DreamSourceLab scopes are examples: only 10 mV/div sensitivity, fast updates on USB3 models, software that actually works well but has almost no features beyond the basics.Some scopesmighthave okay software, but have some weird hardware issues. Virtins comes to mind, and while I have never used their Multi-Instrument software, it looks feature-rich. The issue is the hardware. Sample-rates are only 2.5 times the bandwidth with a single channel running, so with 2 channels running you only have 1.25x sampling. Likewise, only 40 kSample memory. But they have some nice-looking signal generators built-in that can also stream, which could be interesting for lower-frequency work. If I saw one for a good price on ebay I would probably pick it up for funsies just for the streaming waveform generator.When I was looking to get a 'nice' USB scope for hobby use last year I quickly realized that Pico was the only game in town. Since I did not have that large of a budget I just patiently waited for a good deal on ebay and got lucky on a used 5244B. This approach only worked because I did not need more than 2 channels; it is very rare to see large discounts on 4-channel scopes.jason

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 01:48:41 pm
content: Quote from: jasonRF on February 17, 2023, 01:42:03 pmI assure you predominant number of Picoscopes is sold to companies...

author: jasonRF
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 03:15:53 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on February 17, 2023, 01:48:41 pmI believe it. And I would be shocked if they did not dominate that market. My writing can be meandering, but in the first part of my post I was trying to say that we probably don’t have a lot more ‘good’ usb scopes because Pico has cornered the market for the most part. It would take a lot of up-front investment for another company to challenge them. The big players like Tek/Keysight/etc must believe that there just in’t enough money to be made in that market.Jason

author: hans
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 04:05:55 pm
content: I personally think the reason an USB scopes are not very popular, is similar to how many other TE doesn't use GUI's that only operate on PCs. Most people want buttons and don't mess around with desktop software. You boot it up and it always is up in 1min, anyone can use it, etc.I don't think it's the problem that laptops are going out of fashion. In university we sometimes have people showing up with iPad Pro's to C programming classes in 1st year CS/EE. "Because it's a capable piece of kit right?"... yes the iPad Pro with M1 is very fast.. but it runs a crippled OS and is not made for power users. As staff we have to inform them politely they didn't got the right equipment. There is a reason many universities give 'strong recommendations' or even 'requirements' for which laptops to use. In my old school from 2008 era we still had school machines, but they went out of fashion and nobody used them. I don't see these anymore, except for in the library, I think...As @EEVBlog suggested, HDMI outputs can help with the small displays, But for reasons I state before, the PC connectivity can be very important. Namely; a scope has quite a neat seat of hardware under FPGA control (ADCs, DACs) which could also be used in 'rolling' timebase more (a ADC/DAC stream). People pay tons of money to have A/D and D/A boxes for radio equipment.In essence an USB scope doesn'thave to besimpler than a desktop scope. But it seems to be a common design goal, I agree.The main challenge is to transmit waveform data over a cable. The FPGA in the scope can do all the triggering, acquisition, segmenting, etc. Then on a desktop screen, it could be rendered and analyzed with far more processing power.. For automation, which I'm all for in a modern lab, this can be a bliss. If you just want to probe around, give me knobs.But let's say a scope is trying to reach 1M wfm/s at 120pts per waveform. Then that's 120MS/s to transmit over USB, with some framing associated. Even if those samples are >8-bit (e.g. hi-res ADC or hi-res oversampling etc.), then that's about 240MB/s of data to transfer. Modern USB standards can easily cope with this. You could even higher waveform pts to accommodate larger displays or sampling fidelity.Problem is that this kind of custom protocol and implementation is not simple.. and the PC needs to have some grunt as well to do the phosphor drawing outside of FPGA/ASIC fabric.

author: Infraviolet
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 08:15:07 pm
content: David Aurora, I know that picoscope USB oscilloscope software is available as a linux version.As for why not more high quality ones made, perhaps it is a mattter of the analog parts of the scope being the priciest, and so all the computer stuff built in to modrn scopes is cheap by comparison. To make a profit they might have to still sell a USB scope for just as much as a full scope, and that might well put off a lot of buyers?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 09:07:13 pm
content: Quote from: jasonRF on February 17, 2023, 01:42:03 pmWell, TiePie has been around for at least 3 decades. So this isn't some kind of unknown new brand. To be honest, I'm surprised they are still around; in my mind I was thinking they are somehow relatted to Picoscope but it seems they are not. Anyway, I have used one of their earlier devices a very, very long time ago. At least 30 years ago.

author: Kasper
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 09:24:51 pm
content: I used Picoscope years ago and really liked it.

author: jasonRF
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 09:57:05 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 17, 2023, 09:07:13 pmI obviously had no idea they have been around that long. I see that they only have one US distributor, and it is not exactly a well-known vendor. That may be why they were unknown to me until i was in the market last year.Jason

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 09:58:57 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on February 17, 2023, 10:13:25 amAs others pointed out before my reply, the display is a histogram produced from multiple acquisitions.Although I wonder now whether the size of the display record has any effect on the processing required since every sample is processed once no matter what the size of the display record is. It could matter if the acquisition record is decimated because of lack of processing power.

author: David Aurora
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2023, 11:30:44 pm
content: Quote from: Infraviolet on February 17, 2023, 08:15:07 pmI'm not on Linux, soLikely Linux users have had the same issues as Mac users though in that they claimed it worked on that platform, but when you actually buy it and plug it in you find out the old version doesn't work anymore and the new version was beta with half the features you need missing/broken. The stable release of 7 just dropped in the past few weeks though so that may no longer be an issue, I'll find out when my test device arrives.As for the other point, I don't think a USB variant needs to be cheaper than the standalone version. You can get full DSOs for less than many Picoscope models, I don't think people look at them as the cheaper option. It's not about price, it's about convenience/portability/extended functionality in software. Which, if done well, creates its own value. Another example being what Dave said earlier in the thread, Analog Discovery 2 boxes absolutely aren't worth their price for the hardware, the value is in the software.I get that I'm in the minority of people who want a USB scope, but I think part of the unpopularity of them is the clear misunderstanding you see in threads like this about where they fit in the grand scheme of things. I doubt anyone with a clue about electronics is looking for a USB scope to be their primary scope, or expecting one for $100, or wishing they had real knobs, or whatever. They supplement real test gear rather than replace it.My current life is a tech fixing audio gear and my previous life was as a recording engineer/producer, and in this world I've seen these exact same arguments hashed out for decades now with the same misunderstanding. Does a $500 USB audio interface replace a million dollar recording facility? Absolutely not. Is it the best tool for the job when you're fucked for time and need to edit drums on a plane between sessions? 100%.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 18, 2023, 06:03:37 am
content: Quote from: David Aurora on February 17, 2023, 11:30:44 pmI have a top of the range National Instruments USB scope, yet I would greatly pefere to use a bottom of the range Rigol/Siglent on the bench because of the convenience.And there is somethign about having a scope right next to your work on the bench so you don't have the glance up at monitor. Same argument for handheld vs bench multimeter for bench use, handheld wins almost every time, you can bring the meter right physically close to the work.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 18, 2023, 06:06:25 am
content: Quote from: David Aurora on February 17, 2023, 11:30:44 pmHowever to get a dso as powerful as the pico you have to drop big money over the DSO that costs the same.Wfm/s are way less important than what the average person things, there are analog scopes or keysights if you care about wfm/s, what's important is what you can do with the computer at your disposal: as many* decoders as you want, plus the capability of creating your own. As many* math traces, math with formula, plotting math, math on math, multiple views at the same time (spectrum, persistence, actual data)*there is probably an actual limit, i haven't reached it yet.What picoscopes lack is the capability to trigger on anything different than an edge (it does edge, pulse, sequence of edges, runt?) especially decoders or triggering on math traces, as they are all calcuated on the PC side after the acquisition. That's fine as they cost 10x less than DSOs that do that**not the four bog standard decoders of course, all the exotic ones and the custom onesMe, when i'm using the pico i'm usually with my laptop and other equipment, all running on USB, inside a car or simillar environments, on the go. I don't have access to power outlets, i don't have space for more than one screen. USB instruments are what i need for convenience. On the bench depending on what i have to probe, it's either dso or pico, usually pico as it's one click away from starting and probing is already done, but dso if i have to probe around

author: EPAIII
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 18, 2023, 07:06:29 am
content: I fail to see how the desirability and capability of the two types of scope are related.There is no reason in the world why a high capability scope can not be made in a form factor that no one wants.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 18, 2023, 09:15:46 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on February 18, 2023, 06:03:37 amLike I said before. It really depends on what you do. For repair type of work physical standalone scopes are good choice.My son did a lot of assignments for uni using Pico because there you have to document what you do. I do a lot of development using Picos, because, you guessed it, I need to document what I do.Also like JPortici said (him and I are example of people that do work that Picos are good for), there are many things you can do with them no other scopes can. It decodes twice the number of protocols than my fully unlocked MSOX3104T.You can define your own probes and can connect sensors, linearize them and convert a value to true physical property. For instance, connect NTC circuit and show temperature on screen. On X-Y plot where other value is power from math channel that came from two other sensors... OR X-Y plot of 7 other values on same plot...OR...Picoscopes are analytic scopes. Cheapest ones you can buy. You need to go with higher end LeCroy with additional advanced math packages to get something better.. And even then Pico has some functions no other scope has.They are greatbecausethey are different, so they can dodifferentthings. I'm always amazed when people buy 8 scopes that are all basically the same functionality...

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 18, 2023, 11:31:22 am
content: To be honest i wouldn't have considered using one if i wasn't forced by my boss.Because at the time it was the only truly affordable scope that could decode SENT (still is by the way, second in line is a siglent with a much higher price tag) but pretty soon i adopted the correct mindset.An usb scope is not a tool for casual probing, for looking at waveforms, it's an acquisition device that must come with a very powerful software behind it.If the software isn't there, then it's a crap scope you shouldn't be considering. That's why there aren't more good scopes, It's a niche that picoscope fit perfectly.2N3055 correctly wrote that you need to look at Lecroy. Real Lecroys, of course, not the generic rebranded scopes with the same functionalities as everybody else. I you've everusedone, not just played with one, you'll understand.What usually happens is that someone on the other side of the world place the probe where i tell them to, then they send me the acquisitions, then i do the analysis from my desk and minutes to hours later i send them the revised firmware or whatever. Sure the picoscope is not the only scope that does that, but is by far, to me, the one with the best interface, and the fastest software. I tried the infinuum software, hard nope.Picoscope 6 of course, not that shit "app" they did with version 7, a new ui with less possibilities and the same age old bugs still there.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 18, 2023, 06:30:50 pm
content: I have had the opportunity to use them several times and have always gone with a standalone instrument, even if it meant using an obsolete one.1. Their interface means that they take more workspace for a keyboard and mouse, and would require another monitor. I might accept this if it meant adding just another monitor to my workbench but ...2. The USB physical interface to the PC adds another potential ground loop and risks damage to the PC if there is an overload. I have already had this experience. Inexplicably they do not include an isolated USB port, and providing one may or may not work. Ethernet would solve this but it is less common except in standalone instruments.3. The input hardware has always so far proved to be substandard compared to older designs, but of course this applies to many modern standalone DSOs as well, but do not use them either.4. Their user interfaces are horribly designed, at least for the ones I have tested.Some USB oscilloscopes provide features lacking in standalone instruments, but I would require a special need. Cleverscope comes to mind.

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 18, 2023, 07:10:34 pm
content: I wonder if one day there will be advanced traveling component level car repair men (or space ships) that need this kind of light weight miniaturized equipment.The thing that screams "interseting" to me is a no interface scope that hooks up to a visor, like augmented reality. Or for fiber optics. That would actually be useful if you have a 0 access wire you need to probe while under something. Or I guess space suit guys in a drydock of the future that have it show up on their HUD.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 18, 2023, 07:14:41 pm
content: Quote from: coppercone2 on February 18, 2023, 07:10:34 pmThere have been "combination" instruments in the past for those who need to travel, but they never became mainstream.If you are already burdened with a laptop, which seems likely, then maybe USB instruments make more sense, but would you want a USB only multimeter instead of standalone one even then?

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 18, 2023, 07:15:44 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on February 18, 2023, 07:14:41 pmwhen there is a computer in the space suit and you can hook it up to the visor. Mechanic of the year 15000

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 18, 2023, 07:23:06 pm
content: There has been one point in my life where i reached for my keys when I had to measure voltage, then I realized I don't have a DMM on the keychain. Smartphone keychain dmm does exist but I don't own it. Like if you come across a battery, it would be very useful. The old question of "do I replace batteries or is it broken?"It's because I use a keychain flash light quite frequently (beats the smart phone flashlight), and keychain scissors. If you are fond of battery devices for things like sparsey used lights (i.e. random cabinet light), thermometers, etc, it is desirable. Some of the things I improved with cheap AA battery devices were like a gigantic time saver, and I don't need to wonder how permanent the solution is, I just stick a light in there and if you wanna get rid of it in 3 months, no problem. Cable run requires like strategic planning. Thinking about putting up a easy 10-year life alkaline light system in a shed using 2x 6v lantern batteries. set&forget.Or some bull shit like crawl space lighting, infrequent service lights behind a control panel, etc. Sometimes there is room and you have to work there long and frequently enough to make a built in light worth the effort instead of wearing a head lamp.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 18, 2023, 08:38:44 pm
content: Quote from: coppercone2 on February 18, 2023, 07:23:06 pm

author: David Aurora
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 19, 2023, 01:09:48 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on February 18, 2023, 06:03:37 amAgain- I'm not talking about REPLACING a bench scope. In my experience so far every DSO/USB scope can fuck right off for proper audio work anyway, CRO is the only way to fly when you need latency free probing. This is simply for taking out to jobs so I have everything I need to generate and observe basic signals in a laptop case. More detailed work can always be done back at work or I can return with parts/bench scope/power supplies etc if it must be done there as usually that's beyond the initial callout anyway so it doesn't make sense to have all that with me for a mystery job.Agreed on the bench/handheld meter thing though, my bench meters are pretty much just permanently wired into things like dummy loads and everything gets done with my Fluke.