Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Big scope

T

Tim Williams

Jan 1, 1970
0
I thought this was amusing.
http://seventransistorlabs.com/Images/ScopeBig.jpg
The arbitrary difficulty was connecting the apparently ancient DE-9 VGA to
the "modern" DE-15 style. Nothing hard.

Few scopes have video output these days that I can recall (do any even
offer DVI or HDMI?).

I think it's funny that Tek put video only on the green channel (or at
least, predominantly so). They could've easily driven all three together,
for a better-visibility white.

Tim
 
N

Nico Coesel

Jan 1, 1970
0
Tim Williams said:
I thought this was amusing.
http://seventransistorlabs.com/Images/ScopeBig.jpg
The arbitrary difficulty was connecting the apparently ancient DE-9 VGA to
the "modern" DE-15 style. Nothing hard.

Few scopes have video output these days that I can recall (do any even
offer DVI or HDMI?).

I think it's funny that Tek put video only on the green channel (or at
least, predominantly so). They could've easily driven all three together,
for a better-visibility white.

The photo is off. Look how purple that white (?) wall is. I have two
TDS scopes and they output in b&w or color. Recently I had to do some
measurements in my garden (some test setups won't fit in my office). I
put a large monitor on top of the scope so I could read it from
several yards/meters.
 
M

Martin Riddle

Jan 1, 1970
0
I thought this was amusing.
http://seventransistorlabs.com/Images/ScopeBig.jpg
The arbitrary difficulty was connecting the apparently ancient DE-9 VGA to
the "modern" DE-15 style. Nothing hard.

Few scopes have video output these days that I can recall (do any even
offer DVI or HDMI?).

I think it's funny that Tek put video only on the green channel (or at
least, predominantly so). They could've easily driven all three together,
for a better-visibility white.

Tim

What if you tie all three, RGB, together?

The VGA appear to be training related.

Cheers
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
Tim said:
I thought this was amusing.
http://seventransistorlabs.com/Images/ScopeBig.jpg
The arbitrary difficulty was connecting the apparently ancient DE-9 VGA to
the "modern" DE-15 style. Nothing hard.

Few scopes have video output these days that I can recall (do any even
offer DVI or HDMI?).

That is so yesterday :)

I think it's funny that Tek put video only on the green channel (or at
least, predominantly so). They could've easily driven all three together,
for a better-visibility white.

My (now several years old) Instek GDS-2204 can pipe out to a PC, live,
and then I can render the scope output in almost any size I want. Since
I need 1.5x glasses to read instruments but need 5x or so to solder
this 0402 and 0201 SMT stuff this is very useful. I display the scope
live on a computer which shows it at least 4x larger. That I can see
without any glasses and I can simply peak past my 3x glasses or the 5x
Donegan visor.

A client's engineer mounted a 55" big screen TV. I haven't gone that far
yet.
 
T

Tim Williams

Jan 1, 1970
0
Nico Coesel said:
The photo is off. Look how purple that white (?) wall is. I have two
TDS scopes and they output in b&w or color. Recently I had to do some
measurements in my garden (some test setups won't fit in my office). I
put a large monitor on top of the scope so I could read it from
several yards/meters.

Yes, I did some white correction for the tungsten lighting in here, the
green doesn't look right either.

Since tomatoes don't produce much of a signal, might I guess this was an
EMC related lash-up? (Who needs an anechoic chamber, eliminate the
'chamber' and there's nothing to echo!)

Tim
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jeff said:
You might consider looking at DLP, LED, and LCD projectors. ...


Sure, we have one at church but they make too much of a racket and are
bulky.

... When I
visited a local lab, I saw one in use showing spectrum analyzer output
on a wall mounted reflective screen, for everyone in the room to see.
The display wasn't huge or super bright, but quite adequate. I'm
tempted to so the same mostly because my eyesight is slowly
deteriorating. I already use a USB microscope camera for the SMT
stuff (but still can't do 0201 SMT resistors without a real binocular
microscope).

I would love to see touch screen input, for working on-screen scope
buttons on a projected image, but that will probably have to wait.
Maybe a (Microsoft) Surface controlled scope display built into a
glass table top. Or perhaps 3D imaging, so that I can see time,
frequency, and amplitude all at the same time.

An MS OS in a scope? No way. I had the "pleasure" to use numerous
Windows-based scopes over the years and now I am 100% positive that I
don't want one.

Anything worth doing is also worth over-doing, especially with an
unlimited budget.

Incidentally, the new 55" and larger screens might come with a curved
screen. Only $13,000 in OLED.
<http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...ution-CURVED-TV-screen-sale-outside-Asia.html>
The problem with all the big screens currently available is lack of
dot resolution. The 55" big screen TV probably had only 1920 x 1080
dot resolution. That's fine for TV, but not really very good enough
for computing. ...


It is, I do all my design work on this PC via a 27" monitor with
1920*1080 dots.

... I don't know where displaying instrument output on a
large screen fits, but since I would want to display more than one
instrument at a time, plus the computer display, 1920 x 1080 is
probably not enough dots. I'll need to try it to be sure. There is
some hope for getting more dots in the new 4K UHD 3840 x 2160
screens[1], or even 8K UHDTV at 7680 x 4320 resolution:
<http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/...-a-48gbps-tv-signal-over-terrestrial-airwaves>
However, if you want 4K resolution today in a large monitor, have
about $33,000 handy for one of these:
<http://www.pcnation.com/web/details.asp?item=PX7087>
<http://www.mitsubishielectric.com/bu/displaywall/download/pdf/56P_QF65LCU.pdf>


Well, I'd rather buy a 55" TV for $1k or so and donate the other $32,000
to a good cause.

While waiting for technology and prices to catch up to my
expectations, I guess I'll survive with stackable smaller monitors,
multiple video sources, HDMI digital mixers, and Dual Link DVI-I.

I prefer PCs and LAN/USB. Keeps it simple, and small.
[1] 4K UHD resolution varies:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4K_resolution#Resolutions_of_common_formats>
but 3840 x 2160 seems the most common.

Personally I think that's overkill. I am completely happy with 1920*1080.
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
John said:
Tim Williams wrote:
[...]
My (now several years old) Instek GDS-2204 can pipe out to a PC, live,
and then I can render the scope output in almost any size I want. Since
I need 1.5x glasses to read instruments but need 5x or so to solder
this 0402 and 0201 SMT stuff this is very useful. I display the scope
live on a computer which shows it at least 4x larger. That I can see
without any glasses and I can simply peak past my 3x glasses or the 5x
Donegan visor.

A client's engineer mounted a 55" big screen TV. I haven't gone that far
yet.

A lot of scopes are Windows or Linux based, and often have video out, just a
copy of the local display.

If they must have an OS I prefer a real RTOS.

I'm getting my lenses replaced (one down, one to go) and I've chosen to stay
nearsighted. I can wear glasses to drive and ski, but it's handy to compute and
read and work on the bench without needing glasses. Of course, anybody needs
optics to solder tiny surfmount parts.

Too bad you don't like the Mantis. 6X is great for small stuff.

Even if I liked them, they are too big for my work space. The Veho USB
microscope is great. 20x might seem much but once you are down to 0201
or 01005 it's needed. For brick-sized stuff such as 0402 I use a Donegan 5x.
 
N

Nico Coesel

Jan 1, 1970
0
Tim Williams said:
Yes, I did some white correction for the tungsten lighting in here, the
green doesn't look right either.

Since tomatoes don't produce much of a signal, might I guess this was an
EMC related lash-up? (Who needs an anechoic chamber, eliminate the
'chamber' and there's nothing to echo!)

Somehow close. I had to do some testing with ultrasonic gear I
designed. Its easier to test without echos from the walls and stuff in
a room :)
 
T

Tim Williams

Jan 1, 1970
0
Joerg said:
It is, I do all my design work on this PC via a 27" monitor with
1920*1080 dots.

They can pry my Trinitron out of my cold, dead hands. :) I can't stand
using under 1200 vertical height anymore. I can *just* maximize a
document, full page, and eliminate vertical scrolling at 1200. At 1080,
it's just barely too little resolution to comfortably read: not enough
pixels per character. That, and the color -- you have to be perfectly
centered in front of an LCD to get the right colors, and even then, the
edges are at enough of an angle (especially on big panels) that you get a
halo effect. Eugh, no good for drawing.

My laptop has a 15" or so 1920x1200, which is small, but just as legible
at lap distance as my 19" 1600x1200 at desk distance.

What I hate the most about 1920 x 1080 is, it's too short to view a
document full height -- so, you might say, turn it sideways, most panels
support rotated format -- ah, well then it's too narrow, plus you're
trying to scan up and down a huge height, which is an eye and neck strain,
plus the halo effect is more pronounced: the top, middle and bottom of a
page don't look the same.

I should snag a 2048x1536 Trinitron some day. LCDs go up to that
nowadays, but they aren't nearly as cheap as the glut of consumer HDTV
panels. Or if they are, they're full of dead pixels (something a CRT will
never do :) ).

Tim
 
F

Fred Abse

Jan 1, 1970
0
An MS OS in a scope? No way. I had the "pleasure" to use numerous
Windows-based scopes over the years and now I am 100% positive that I
don't want one.

You and me, both. Its getting to the point where you can't take a dump
without Microsoft products.
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jeff said:
Take a look at the LED projectors. They're not very bright, but they
also don't burn much power or produce much heat. I spent some time
with a Dell M110 LED projector:
<http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=bsd&sku=225-1466>
<www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824260100>
1280x800 dots. The specs claim about 2.5 meter maximum distance to
the screen, which would produce about a 2 meter diagonal picture.
That's probably larger than I would want.

Power consumption is 30 or 44 watts depending on display mode. In the
higher power mode, the fan noise might be a somewhat objectionable. In
the 30 watt mode, it's fairly quiet. However, there are other LED
projectors that make less fan noise.

That's indeed a nice little machine. However, it would have to go on the
opposite side of the lab bench where there are no communications
connections, certainly not the bazillion USB and RS232 links to lab
equipment.

There is some question as to whether such scopes are an oscilloscope
mainframe with a computer inside, or a PC, with a scope card
installed. I've seen both styles. Either way, I believe the
consensus is that to produce a computing or calculating display (FFT,
auto-fit, measurement, etc), you need a computer.


My scope does all that with an RTOS. It does not need a computer, the PC
is optional and only there to provide a larger display, direct Excel
linking, et cetera.

... At this time, I
guess Windoze and Linux are the most popular operating systems. Since
the OS is needed and unlikely to disappear, the scope OS will likely
be one of these.

There are many uC-based RTOS'es, and then there is also QNX which in my
experience is the best OS ever written for a PC. I could not make it
crash in almost a year, and I am pretty good at crashing software or an
OS during the "Joerg test". At Endosonics there was once a big
ultrasound machine with a blue screen. Someone asked what happened to
it. "Oh, that one has been joerged". I was the ultimate endurance test
for systems at times. The first thing I usually do when confronted with
a new design is to rock the circuit breaker back and forth a few times.
That alone sends a lot of stuff back to the drawing board.

What a wonderful world it would be if you had interchangeable devices
and peripherals with a common and standardized interconnect bus
scheme. Well, maybe two buses, one for the high speed devices, and
one for the low speed devices. Plug anything into anything and it
will "just work". Want to display the output of your oscilloscope on
the LCD panel in your refrigerator, just plug it in and watch your
test results on the fridge while preparing dinner. Unfortunately, my
interface utopia is a long way off.

Most things can be brought to the LAN. Heck, even my multimeter can hop
onto the LAN and probably even be a "web site". So IMHO that should be
the standard. USB for smaller more local stuff.

[1] 4K UHD resolution varies:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4K_resolution#Resolutions_of_common_formats>
but 3840 x 2160 seems the most common.
Personally I think that's overkill. I am completely happy with 1920*1080.

Now, that's a problem. A happy customer is someone that is not
spending money searching for solutions. This is very bad. If
everyone were happy with their existing technology devices, the
American economy would grind to a halt and collapse. ...


If everyone was like me almost the complete automotive industry on the
planet would already have disappeared. But I am not the worst case. The
worst case was an elderly lady who bought a British sports car in 1961,
used. Still looked like 1961. A few years ago she said that the car will
likely survive her. That ought to be Detroit's nightmare.

... Obviously,
something must be done to prevent you from being happy. The
traditional methods are to wave new toys at you in the hope that you
might be interested, and to trash the existing technology by labeling
it obsolete, passe, antiquated, inadequate, or non-standard. ...


Nowadays the buzzwords would be cool or sizzling.

... Neither
is very effective, but if repeated often enough, for a sufficiently
long duration, they eventually become effective. ...


But then you get guys like me who do not pay attention to advertizing.

... In this situation, I
recommend that one's status as an engineer be tied to the size and
resolution of their monitor. There may also be a tie in with
productivity, as bigger displays can create more distractions... Ummm,
never mind the productivity angle. Whatever the method, you will
eventually be convinced that everything you own is obsolete, that
there are problems with your the existing technology, that you are
fashionably retarded, that you are no longer "cool", and that
incremental upgrades to a larger higher resolution display, with a
more current acronym content, will remedy these problems.

So how about my Boonton megacycle meter? :)

http://www.ohio.edu/people/postr/bapix/Dip_59.htm
 
W

whit3rd

Jan 1, 1970
0
I think it's funny that Tek put video only on the green channel (or at
least, predominantly so). They could've easily driven all three together,
for a better-visibility white.

If this were a CRT, the monochrome image would be high quality (no dots) compared
to a color image. A hypothetical color CRT has convergence issues, white traces will be
rendered as RED plus GREEN plus BLUE curves, not necessarily all on top
of each other.
 
T

Tim Williams

Jan 1, 1970
0
whit3rd said:
If this were a CRT, the monochrome image would be high quality (no dots)
compared
to a color image. A hypothetical color CRT has convergence issues,
white traces will be
rendered as RED plus GREEN plus BLUE curves, not necessarily all on top
of each other.

Since the scan rate is so low and chunky at that resolution, you can see
the separate scan lines up close; I didn't notice any convergence, but
with green dominant or alone, obviously I wouldn't expect to (even at
1600x1200 I only see the narest hint of divergence in one corner :) ).

It's certainly not an LCD with big blocks for pixels (or better/worse yet,
interpolated pixels), although that's probably not a bad idea -- a mono
LCD would work as well as a CRT here; if I could even find a native
640x480 resolution panel, it would be more crisp than the CRT.

Tim
 
C

Charlie E.

Jan 1, 1970
0
My (now several years old) Instek GDS-2204 can pipe out to a PC, live,
and then I can render the scope output in almost any size I want. Since
I need 1.5x glasses to read instruments but need 5x or so to solder
this 0402 and 0201 SMT stuff this is very useful. I display the scope
live on a computer which shows it at least 4x larger. That I can see
without any glasses and I can simply peak past my 3x glasses or the 5x
Donegan visor.

You might consider looking at DLP, LED, and LCD projectors. When I
visited a local lab, I saw one in use showing spectrum analyzer output
on a wall mounted reflective screen, for everyone in the room to see.
The display wasn't huge or super bright, but quite adequate. I'm
tempted to so the same mostly because my eyesight is slowly
deteriorating. I already use a USB microscope camera for the SMT
stuff (but still can't do 0201 SMT resistors without a real binocular
microscope).

I would love to see touch screen input, for working on-screen scope
buttons on a projected image, but that will probably have to wait.
Maybe a (Microsoft) Surface controlled scope display built into a
glass table top. Or perhaps 3D imaging, so that I can see time,
frequency, and amplitude all at the same time.
A client's engineer mounted a 55" big screen TV. I haven't gone that far
yet.

Anything worth doing is also worth over-doing, especially with an
unlimited budget.

Incidentally, the new 55" and larger screens might come with a curved
screen. Only $13,000 in OLED.
<http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...ution-CURVED-TV-screen-sale-outside-Asia.html>
The problem with all the big screens currently available is lack of
dot resolution. The 55" big screen TV probably had only 1920 x 1080
dot resolution. That's fine for TV, but not really very good enough
for computing. I don't know where displaying instrument output on a
large screen fits, but since I would want to display more than one
instrument at a time, plus the computer display, 1920 x 1080 is
probably not enough dots. I'll need to try it to be sure. There is
some hope for getting more dots in the new 4K UHD 3840 x 2160
screens[1], or even 8K UHDTV at 7680 x 4320 resolution:
<http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/...-a-48gbps-tv-signal-over-terrestrial-airwaves>
However, if you want 4K resolution today in a large monitor, have
about $33,000 handy for one of these:
<http://www.pcnation.com/web/details.asp?item=PX7087>
<http://www.mitsubishielectric.com/bu/displaywall/download/pdf/56P_QF65LCU.pdf>
While waiting for technology and prices to catch up to my
expectations, I guess I'll survive with stackable smaller monitors,
multiple video sources, HDMI digital mixers, and Dual Link DVI-I.



[1] 4K UHD resolution varies:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4K_resolution#Resolutions_of_common_formats>
but 3840 x 2160 seems the most common.

Actually, the new Sony 80" 4K HDTV is only $25K!

(Just priced one, for fun, for a client!)

Charlie
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jeff said:
1. Point the projector at the ceiling. You can put it anywhere.
2. If you chair doesn't recline sufficiently, replace it with a
recliner or a couch.


And then send a photo to my clients, with me on the couch :)

3. You only need one HDMI cable to the projector. The rest can go
through a media converter or use a PC as a media converter. RS232 for
a projector? Huh?


It's the equipment. For example, the old logic analyzer has a very small
CRT but one can use RS232. Goes into PC, PC display pics -> bingo.

4. However, if you decide to install it on the opposite side of the
bench, it might be far enough away that you won't be bothered by the
fan noise.
5. Try to located the projector near a window. If you're bored, or
find it necessary to irritate the neighbors, point the projector out
the window and let it light up the fog, haze, smog, or neighbors
house. 300 lumens is quite bright at night.
<http://images.wikia.com/batman/images/b/b1/Bat_Signal.jpg>

Today in the pool I had the idea of projecting a pic there, have a small
margarita mixer on the pool deck, and float around in the water. My wife
thought that would be decadent :)

IntervalZero real time extensions:
<http://www.intervalzero.com>

I really don't trust Windows when it comes to realtime.

NI Real Time hypervisor for multicore PXI boxes:
<http://sine.ni.com/nips/cds/view/p/lang/en/nid/207302>

My experience with NI is that everything will cost at least $500. So
I've largely stayed away from them.

Hadcon real time module for Windoze:
<http://www.hadcon.ru/rtmintroduc.htm>

Acontis real time extensions for Windoze.
<http://www.acontis.com/eng/products/windows-real-time-hypervisor/>

etc... Probably a bunch more for Linux. Hmmm... you can even get
real time Java:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_time_Java>
which should run on both.

I'm not a programmist, so I have no experience with any of these.
Unless you're concerned about catching a virus or hosting a botnet on
your oscilloscope, I don't see a problem.

Well, I prefer something that's already natively capable of realtime.
Such as QNX.

I forgot about QNX. I agree, that would be a good, but possibly
expensive, choice for an instrument OS. I looked at the licensing
terms about 10 years ago. It was too much for a marine radio.
However, QNX has done well with automobile computers, infotainment,
and Blackberry phones. The QNX concept car:
<http://www.qnx.com/products/qnxcar/index.html?lang=en>
I couldn't find any mention of using QNX in test equipment.

I priced it out 15 years ago and licensing was quite favorable. Of
course, there wasn't anything else comparable out there and as far as I
can see there still isn't.

We had a power line impairment simulator (from Dranetz ???) that was
quite good at destroying itself as well as the unit under test. I
became tired of fixing the beast, so I built my own version. It was a
rotating disk with random detents that activated two easily
replaceable switch contacts. (I was merciful and left the protective
ground intact). As the disk spun, the switches would open and close,
simulating the typical PG&E power line glitch. It was crude, ugly,
and quite effective.

A former boss had a different plan. He would turn everything on in
the rack full of radios, set it to transmit at very low power into a
dummy load, and close the rack doors tight. He would then go for
lunch or a cocktail and return about an hour later. Most systems
initially overheated and did not survive this test. Today, it's
common to leave 1RU spaces between rack mounted devices that get hot.

"Overheated and not survived" clearly points to serious design flaws. If
there is a chance of overheating there should always be temp sense and
graceful shutdown.

I've also had coworkers and customers that have the ability to destroy
everything they touch. For example, I had a customer that was
experiencing bizarre computer symptoms which I couldn't seem to either
duplicate or repair. So, I just gave her my known working office
computer in exchange for her problem machine. My known working
computer then preceded to exhibit the same symptoms. I can only
conclude that certain people have the ability to break electronics.

Those are the people you want in quality control :)

I also had a coworker that would kill any component he touched, even
if the humidity was high, he was wearing non-synthetic clothes, a
grounded wrist and heel strap, and the bench was grounded. I watched
it happen several times. An electrometer test showed that he
consistently produced about 1Kv of static electricity, even with all
the grounding devices in place. He later moved into sales, where he
blew up every computer that he touched.

I have a similar trait: Worked in medical ultrasound much of my life but
I am one of the worst when it comes to ultrasound penetration and
visibility.

Yep. High resolution video does suck the bandwidth, but GigE cameras
work well. USB should be for connecting peripherals, not for
networking.


Exactly. I've often thought of creating yet another business to fill
this need. How about eVil Systems as a name? The base product is a
chip or small PCB, with onboard NVRAM and RTC with I'll simply call a
"warranty timer". Lots of devices qualify. It sits innocently in the
middle of a crowded board, logging seconds, coulombs, power cycles,
and stock prices. If the accumulated data indicates that the warranty
period has been exceeded, the device performs a destructive action,
like applying high voltage to the low voltage power bus. This method
of destruction is particularly nice because the electrolytic capacitor
companies can be blamed. Some randomness will probably be necessary
to prevent it looking like the failure was intentional. Subtlety can
also be introduced by creating increasing unreliability and
spontaneous reboots just prior to end of warranty. The timer can also
be reset remotely after payment of a service contract. I'm fairly
certain Federal funding can be obtained as this device would be
considered an economic stimulus.

Too late. This has already been invented and usually comes in the form
of toner and ink cartridges.
Ah, but you do pay attention. You just don't realize that. In a past
life, I worked in marketing and advertising, mostly in subliminal
advertising. After about a year, I was fairly knowledgeable in how it
works and fairly well practiced in some of the techniques. Despite
having this inside knowledge, I was tricked several times by my
coworkers with subliminals. Please feel free to claim that you are
not affected by advertising, as such people are some of the easiest to
sway. The most difficult are the GUM (great unwashed masses) that are
literally being bombarded by subliminals, and have been callous and
indifferent. People with above average IQ's tend to think about
things first, which is where subliminals have their best effect.

You'd have to watch a great deal of TV to be exposed to subliminal
advertizing. And there is the first problem marketeers have in our case.
We have no cable or dish. Only an antenna and since that dreaded DTV was
made law, reception falls apart so often that what little TV consumption
is left has shrunk to a minimum. So the drill is:

Tape old movies we like, repeat recording as often as needed until you
luck out and the station won't pixelate out in the middle of it, then
watch it some time later while skipping all ads via the FFW button.

TV stations have shot themselves in the foot by two mistakes:

a. Agreeing to have a working system replaced by a flakey one with
sub-par RF path error tolerance.

b. Giving up precious VHF space for less lucrative UHF space. That one
I'll never understand. It has resulted in numerous stations not reaching
suburbia anymore. Suburbia -> people with discretionary dough -> no
longer reached -> drop in ad viewer number -> drop in ad revenue.

Repetition also works quite well at all levels. It can be a jingle or
tune that is repeated by the media until we associate a product with
that tune. Then, all you have to do is play the tune mixed in with
the elevator music, and people will automatically "want" the product.
I've watched this happen and was amazed at how well it works.

Well, yeah, but only the good ones stick. Volkswagen marketing is
exceptionally bright there. But will it result in increased sales? Not
with me and my wife. Or take the repetitive slogan everyone knows: "If
it fits, it ships". So I took a peek, saw that the prices aren't
favorable, and to this day I still pack my own box and ship for a buck
or two less. Sometimes the difference is well over $5.

The way our system works is that marketing creates the need, and sales
fills the need. Marketing look for a problem, which usually means
dissatisfied customers and defines a product that will make them less
dissatisfied. Sales tries to convince the customer that the product
their pushing will fill the need or solve the problem. If the GUM
ever asked themselves "do I really have a problem that needs solving?"
most of the economy would collapse. I don't know how many times I've
dragged home some piece of junk where I couldn't remember why I bought
it, or what problem was it suppose to solve. That's subliminals at
work.

Or should work. They fail to work with many people who have lots of
discretionary income. For example, you can't win much if you convince
people who live on food stamps.

Anyway, I could go on and on and on and on the subject, but that would
be too much topic drift. There are some good books on the subject,
especially those by Wilson Bryan Keys.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilson_Bryan_Key>
His first book, Subliminal Seduction is probably the best, and offers
a dated, but accurate description of the basic principles.


That was replaced by various transistor or FET grid dip meters. ...


I have one, a HD-1250, probably the same one you have. But those easily
go *PHUT* in a high energy system.

...(Have
three Heath grid dip meters). Further replaced by various antenna
analyzers. Carrying such an antique on a field service visit is more
than an embarrassment. What will the customer think? You can't
afford anything better than that? Why are you working on my project
with junk for test equipment? ...


Au contraire. I had cases where people mumbled things like "That looks
like voodoo" or "Now he's really off his rocker". Then at lunchtime I
announced the problem to be found and some jaws dropped.

... Is that thing NIST traceable
calibrated? ...


In engineering? Who cares?

... Is he running a museum on the side? Rather than be
forced to answer such embarrassing questions, wouldn't it be better if
you simply upgraded to the latest in high fashion test equipment?


No, because it frequently found stuff that their fancy schmantzy $10k+
analyzer simply did not see.

Something like an Anritsu Site Master or other portable RF service
monitor? With a modern piece of test equipment, the customer is
assured that they're getting the best measurements possible, from a
device that can genuinely be trusted to produce accurate numbers.

They often don't. Classic real-life example: I was called out to a
client who had internal noise issues in a high-sensitivity chemical
analysis machine they just developed. I dreaded it because it meant at
least 3h each way on the freeways, can't fly there plus I needed to
schlepp tons of gear. And my lower back doesn't like loading all that.
So I got there, they had a luxurious Stanford Research analyzer set up,
looked and looked and looked, couldn't find a thing. "Must be software,
but the guys said it's impossible because the noise is clearly in the
rwa data". So I tried. Shut the SRS analyzer down within 10 minutes.
Pulled a laptop and a fairly ugly contraption out of my stuff, people
cracked jokes about it. By early afternoon we had it, fan-blade induced
noise that triggered air flow pulsing near a cap which in turn created
wee microphonics. I showed them a fairly well distinguished 7-8Hz peak
that was not very stable. On the SRS there was ... nothing. "No, you've
got to be kidding, that's an artifact or something". Slowed the fan down
with the palm of my hand, peak moved towards 4Hz. "I'll be darn!"

Even many boat anchors have never been reached in performance by
"modern" gear. One is the HP-3577 network analyzer. Same with the
HP-3585 baseband analyzer. Or the Tek 2565 scopes. And on and on. So if
you face a difficult analog job chances are that you won't be able to
deliver your best performance if you only have "modern" gear.
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jeff said:
Nothing is real and there's never enough time. Windoze just makes it
look nice.


If QNX is that good a fit, so perfect for the application, and has
been around for many years, why aren't more instrument makers using
it? There's usually an obscure reason, such as them irritating
someone important in the industry, creative pricing, or their
presidents belonging to the wrong country club.

I have no idea. It is in wide use but not in consumer applications.
Well, except for smart phones.

When we made our decision for QNX and against Windows CE in the 90's the
reasons were crystal-clear. The QNX support team came across as vastly
more knowledgeable and the license fees were very modest. Open source
was not an option because this was med tech where you need 100%
trackability.

One of my customers got a QNX runtime license quote in about 2002 of
about $350 per device. Since the customer didn't plan to ship enough
units to justify a license with better prices, the high license cost
effectively killed the idea. I don't recall what OS or RTOS was
eventually used.


We were quoted way lower in 1997. $350 is a show stopper for just about
any product.
The rack of equipment had no centralized power management or alarms.
Each piece of equipment allegedly took care of its own power and alarm
requirements. At least that was the plan. What usually happened is
that the hot air would accumulate at the top of the rack, and heat up
the top boxes. There were vents but convection wasn't enough to keep
the rack cool. The top box also blocked air flow from the top of the
rack. The customer refused to allow rack fans because of "reliability
issues" or some such vague excuse. I was seeing overheating traps
from equipment that hardly belched any heat but happened to be at the
top of the rack. I suggested that it might be helpful if we inverted
the rack, but that was rejected for aesthetic reasons.

But still, nothing is supposed to die in here. If it does -> back to the
drawing board. It's the same with automotive, if the water-cooling
system fails because a hose burst that is not supposed to take out the
pricey electronics.

In the end, we repackaged one of the boxes, and used the available
rack space to improve the air flow. I put some effort into optimizing
the air flow. However, the big improvement came when the customer was
finally convinced that maybe a big fan would be helpful. As for
reliability, I get the BS award by suggesting that TWO fans would be
more reliable than one.

:)



I believe that's called "thick skinned" which is roughly defined as:
3. insensitive or hardened to criticism; obtuse; callous.

I usually try not to be but that seems to have no impact on the huge
ultrasound signal losses in my body.

Very true. I wonder if the warranty timer idea is patented:

Method and Apparatus for Validating Time-Limited Warranty
<https://www.google.com/patents/US20130054475>

This one displays how many days are left on the warranty on a stun
gun. I can only speculate what happens when the warranty expires:
<https://www.google.com/patents/EP1672650B1>

Plenty of others that mostly deal with methods of providing a variable
warranty period. I think there's room for my idea. Does anyone make
a chip with a self destruct feature or explosive device inside? Can
such a small bomb be reliably modeled with LTSPICE?


I sure hope not.
Nope. It's heavily used. At one point in the 1970's, public pressure
was sufficient to get Congress to consider enacting laws against the
use of subliminals. An investigation was ordered, which concluded
that subliminals don't work and therefore no law was required. That
was the signal for Madison Avenue to go berserk with subliminals. It's
been like that ever since.

A good example is what happened when an employer decided to hire a
professional advertising agency to promote a product that I had helped
design. The agency put together a full page magazine advertisement.
This was before electronic layout so everything was photographed and
later overlaid on a light table or in a darkroom. The original proofs
had some subliminals that ad agency added for no obvious reason. It
then went to the photo lab for color separation, where the lab added
subliminals using an overlay. The ad now had a very light mosaic of
the word "sex" all over it. The magazine or the printers added their
overlay of subliminals in the form of the words "good job" that I
found in several places on the final magazine advert. The radio sold
well.

So, why did literally everyone that could touch the advertisement add
subliminals? For one thing, it's easy to do overlays. However, the
real reason was that they work. Essentially, they're hidden
advertisements for the ad agency, for the photo lab, for the printers,
and for the magazine. By adding subliminals, they sell their
services, and maybe a little will rub off on the customers product.

It's much more difficult to see subliminals on TV or in movies.
However, if you can do stop frames, they're fairly obvious.

Ok, but if they worked, why is it that I pretty much never buy any
products from ads? When I need something I browse for it, but only then.
Maybe us guys are wired differently than women but I have never felt the
urge to absolutely have to have something, or even go on a shopping tour
with no particular needs.

[...]
 
J

Jasen Betts

Jan 1, 1970
0
When we made our decision for QNX and against Windows CE in the 90's the
reasons were crystal-clear. The QNX support team came across as vastly
more knowledgeable and the license fees were very modest. Open source
was not an option because this was med tech where you need 100%
trackability.

huh?
By "trackability" do you mean you need someone to hide behind if the
shit hts the fan, or do you mean something else, and if so what?
 
S

Spehro Pefhany

Jan 1, 1970
0
I priced it out 15 years ago and licensing was quite favorable. Of
course, there wasn't anything else comparable out there and as far as I
can see there still isn't.

What do you think will happen to QNX if something happens to BBRY/RIM?



Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
 
J

John Devereux

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jasen Betts said:
huh?
By "trackability" do you mean you need someone to hide behind if the
shit hts the fan, or do you mean something else, and if so what?

Yes that seemed peculiar to me too. Typically an open source project has
every line of every commit signed off and "trackable". As opposed to
some opaque binary blob that you just have to hope works. (And the
supplier likely explicitly disclaims all warranty on).

But I assume Joerg is talking more about something like "certified".
 
Top