Re: DSO Oscillosope

Carlos,

I would snap it up in a heartbeat!

Mariss

--- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@y..., "Carlos Guillermo" <carlos@v...> wrote:
> Hi Mariss -
>
> I searched ebay for the scopes you recommended, and ran across a
> Tektronix 2230 analog/digital DSO. Are you familiar with this?
> Would you recommend it?
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1763445024
>
> TIA,
>
> Carlos Guillermo
> VERVE Engineering & Design
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mariss92705 [mailto:mariss92705@y...]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 1:05 AM
> To: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@y...
> Subject: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: DSO Oscillosope
>
> Peter,
>
> In a perfect world I would first have a "real" scope, then a DSO
> and
> finally a PC based scope, in that order.
>
> A "real" scope is an analog 2-channel 100MHz one. It is faithfully
> displays what is really there. Non-periodic waveforms are a
> problem
> of course but a scope with good writing speed gives you a chance.
>
> The advantage of an analog scope is it is not suceptable aliasing
> artifacts that improperly setup DSOs are. Really good analog
> scopes
> are Tektronix 465 which can be had for a song now. Another good
> choice is a Tektronix 2247 though its trigger, focus and writing
> speed leaves much to be desired.
>
> A good DSO would be a Tektronix TDS360. Not real fast but good for
> most applications. I always double check it with an analog scope
> before I rely on its readings though.
>
> PC based scopes I don't really trust. I have compared their
> results
> against an analog scope and the results have ranged from mediocre
> to
> terrible. Given the choice, I would pick a good used DSO over a PC
> scope any day of the week.
>
> Just my 2 cents worth.
>
> Mariss