A good digital oscilloscope?
in [Design]
|
From: krw on 30 Dec 2009 18:50 On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 15:09:10 -0800, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >Jamie wrote: >> Joerg wrote: >> >>> Joel Koltner wrote: >>> >>>> "Joerg" <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote in message >>>> news:7pt6ptFvehU1(a)mid.individual.net... >>>> >>>>> From August this year: >>>>> http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2009/08/tektronix_exports_manufacturin.html >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> "However, Culp said profit margins were high and the pipeline of new >>>> products was strong." >>>> >>>> Those high profit margins are one of the things that's killing them. >>>> If you're just re-badging Chinese-engineered and manufactured scopes >>>> and what-not at the low- to mid-end of equipment, why should the >>>> customer hand over high profit margins when, e.g., Instek is >>>> perfectly happy to make do with less? >>>> >>> >>> Bingo! Which is why I chose Instek. Plus it had more sample memory and >>> features, for less money. Now clients of mine are buying those as well >>> ... >>> >>> Last time a client asked me whether they also sold a LabView driver >>> for theirs. "No, they don't sell one, you just download it for free >>> just like the PC control software." ... "Oh, really?" >>> >> Which is why I see people like Allen Bradley, soon to join those like Tek! >> It's totally ridiculous with their hardware pricing on top of their >> software pricing and licensing.. >> >> What are they? Hardware or Microsoft? >> >> As far as I'm concerned, they are an industrial hardware manufacturer >> and the software to configure their electronics should be supplied as a >> free tool or maybe enough to pay for the materials at best. >> >> It seems to me with the lack of any recent advancement in hardware, I >> think all they want to do is have an office and just >> sell software that requires no employees, because they can get the code >> written in India and charge you dearly for the use of it! It's like >> paying rent on a program which isn't cheap! >> >> It used to be you had a one time payment and they gave you a key or >> what ever for one computer, now, they make you pay over and over because >> your license runs out. >> >> Just another fine example of greed! We are now buying Omron >> electronics because they are worth the money, software is great and >> reasonable. Also looking into other avenues. >> >> Good bye AB! >> > >Or as they say, we vote with our feet :-) I interviewed with AB (Rockwell) a couple of years ago. They had a firewall between their software, firmware, and hardware groups. The FPGA folks were in the firmware group along with the embedded software types, which turned me off completely (LM was the same). There didn't look to be much communication between the groups, either. It wouldn't surprise me if the hardware and software organizations had their own P&L spreadsheets too. Nuts.
From: Joerg on 30 Dec 2009 19:50 krw wrote: > On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 15:09:10 -0800, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> > wrote: > >> Jamie wrote: >>> Joerg wrote: >>> >>>> Joel Koltner wrote: >>>> >>>>> "Joerg" <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote in message >>>>> news:7pt6ptFvehU1(a)mid.individual.net... >>>>> >>>>>> From August this year: >>>>>> http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2009/08/tektronix_exports_manufacturin.html >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "However, Culp said profit margins were high and the pipeline of new >>>>> products was strong." >>>>> >>>>> Those high profit margins are one of the things that's killing them. >>>>> If you're just re-badging Chinese-engineered and manufactured scopes >>>>> and what-not at the low- to mid-end of equipment, why should the >>>>> customer hand over high profit margins when, e.g., Instek is >>>>> perfectly happy to make do with less? >>>>> >>>> Bingo! Which is why I chose Instek. Plus it had more sample memory and >>>> features, for less money. Now clients of mine are buying those as well >>>> ... >>>> >>>> Last time a client asked me whether they also sold a LabView driver >>>> for theirs. "No, they don't sell one, you just download it for free >>>> just like the PC control software." ... "Oh, really?" >>>> >>> Which is why I see people like Allen Bradley, soon to join those like Tek! >>> It's totally ridiculous with their hardware pricing on top of their >>> software pricing and licensing.. >>> >>> What are they? Hardware or Microsoft? >>> >>> As far as I'm concerned, they are an industrial hardware manufacturer >>> and the software to configure their electronics should be supplied as a >>> free tool or maybe enough to pay for the materials at best. >>> >>> It seems to me with the lack of any recent advancement in hardware, I >>> think all they want to do is have an office and just >>> sell software that requires no employees, because they can get the code >>> written in India and charge you dearly for the use of it! It's like >>> paying rent on a program which isn't cheap! >>> >>> It used to be you had a one time payment and they gave you a key or >>> what ever for one computer, now, they make you pay over and over because >>> your license runs out. >>> >>> Just another fine example of greed! We are now buying Omron >>> electronics because they are worth the money, software is great and >>> reasonable. Also looking into other avenues. >>> >>> Good bye AB! >>> >> Or as they say, we vote with our feet :-) > > I interviewed with AB (Rockwell) a couple of years ago. They had a > firewall between their software, firmware, and hardware groups. The > FPGA folks were in the firmware group along with the embedded software > types, which turned me off completely (LM was the same). There didn't > look to be much communication between the groups, either. It wouldn't > surprise me if the hardware and software organizations had their own > P&L spreadsheets too. Nuts. In defense companies you have to do that for security reasons. There will be firewalls even between individual hardware groups. I don't think that they split P&L. But in a non-defense setting that would make no sense at all. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
From: krw on 30 Dec 2009 20:10 On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 16:50:42 -0800, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >krw wrote: >> On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 15:09:10 -0800, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> >> wrote: >> >>> Jamie wrote: >>>> Joerg wrote: >>>> >>>>> Joel Koltner wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> "Joerg" <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote in message >>>>>> news:7pt6ptFvehU1(a)mid.individual.net... >>>>>> >>>>>>> From August this year: >>>>>>> http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2009/08/tektronix_exports_manufacturin.html >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> "However, Culp said profit margins were high and the pipeline of new >>>>>> products was strong." >>>>>> >>>>>> Those high profit margins are one of the things that's killing them. >>>>>> If you're just re-badging Chinese-engineered and manufactured scopes >>>>>> and what-not at the low- to mid-end of equipment, why should the >>>>>> customer hand over high profit margins when, e.g., Instek is >>>>>> perfectly happy to make do with less? >>>>>> >>>>> Bingo! Which is why I chose Instek. Plus it had more sample memory and >>>>> features, for less money. Now clients of mine are buying those as well >>>>> ... >>>>> >>>>> Last time a client asked me whether they also sold a LabView driver >>>>> for theirs. "No, they don't sell one, you just download it for free >>>>> just like the PC control software." ... "Oh, really?" >>>>> >>>> Which is why I see people like Allen Bradley, soon to join those like Tek! >>>> It's totally ridiculous with their hardware pricing on top of their >>>> software pricing and licensing.. >>>> >>>> What are they? Hardware or Microsoft? >>>> >>>> As far as I'm concerned, they are an industrial hardware manufacturer >>>> and the software to configure their electronics should be supplied as a >>>> free tool or maybe enough to pay for the materials at best. >>>> >>>> It seems to me with the lack of any recent advancement in hardware, I >>>> think all they want to do is have an office and just >>>> sell software that requires no employees, because they can get the code >>>> written in India and charge you dearly for the use of it! It's like >>>> paying rent on a program which isn't cheap! >>>> >>>> It used to be you had a one time payment and they gave you a key or >>>> what ever for one computer, now, they make you pay over and over because >>>> your license runs out. >>>> >>>> Just another fine example of greed! We are now buying Omron >>>> electronics because they are worth the money, software is great and >>>> reasonable. Also looking into other avenues. >>>> >>>> Good bye AB! >>>> >>> Or as they say, we vote with our feet :-) >> >> I interviewed with AB (Rockwell) a couple of years ago. They had a >> firewall between their software, firmware, and hardware groups. The >> FPGA folks were in the firmware group along with the embedded software >> types, which turned me off completely (LM was the same). There didn't >> look to be much communication between the groups, either. It wouldn't >> surprise me if the hardware and software organizations had their own >> P&L spreadsheets too. Nuts. > > >In defense companies you have to do that for security reasons. There >will be firewalls even between individual hardware groups. I don't think >that they split P&L. Sure, different customers, different contracts. This was a firewall between groups working on the same product. The hardware people didn't seem to talk to (or even know much about) the firmware people; "they're over there, somewhere". I can't imagine how one can firewall FPGA designers from the hardware designers, but they did. Crazy. >But in a non-defense setting that would make no sense at all. Even in a defense setting, firmware and hardware sorta go together. I did both but only because the hardware developer mucked it up so bad (I found out when I was going through the design trying to figure out what I had to control). OTOH, the (embedded) firmware people didn't know too much about FPGA stuff, yet may manager was the OS guy.
From: Joerg on 30 Dec 2009 20:25 krw wrote: > On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 16:50:42 -0800, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> > wrote: > >> krw wrote: >>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 15:09:10 -0800, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Jamie wrote: >>>>> Joerg wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Joel Koltner wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> "Joerg" <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:7pt6ptFvehU1(a)mid.individual.net... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> From August this year: >>>>>>>> http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2009/08/tektronix_exports_manufacturin.html >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> "However, Culp said profit margins were high and the pipeline of new >>>>>>> products was strong." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Those high profit margins are one of the things that's killing them. >>>>>>> If you're just re-badging Chinese-engineered and manufactured scopes >>>>>>> and what-not at the low- to mid-end of equipment, why should the >>>>>>> customer hand over high profit margins when, e.g., Instek is >>>>>>> perfectly happy to make do with less? >>>>>>> >>>>>> Bingo! Which is why I chose Instek. Plus it had more sample memory and >>>>>> features, for less money. Now clients of mine are buying those as well >>>>>> ... >>>>>> >>>>>> Last time a client asked me whether they also sold a LabView driver >>>>>> for theirs. "No, they don't sell one, you just download it for free >>>>>> just like the PC control software." ... "Oh, really?" >>>>>> >>>>> Which is why I see people like Allen Bradley, soon to join those like Tek! >>>>> It's totally ridiculous with their hardware pricing on top of their >>>>> software pricing and licensing.. >>>>> >>>>> What are they? Hardware or Microsoft? >>>>> >>>>> As far as I'm concerned, they are an industrial hardware manufacturer >>>>> and the software to configure their electronics should be supplied as a >>>>> free tool or maybe enough to pay for the materials at best. >>>>> >>>>> It seems to me with the lack of any recent advancement in hardware, I >>>>> think all they want to do is have an office and just >>>>> sell software that requires no employees, because they can get the code >>>>> written in India and charge you dearly for the use of it! It's like >>>>> paying rent on a program which isn't cheap! >>>>> >>>>> It used to be you had a one time payment and they gave you a key or >>>>> what ever for one computer, now, they make you pay over and over because >>>>> your license runs out. >>>>> >>>>> Just another fine example of greed! We are now buying Omron >>>>> electronics because they are worth the money, software is great and >>>>> reasonable. Also looking into other avenues. >>>>> >>>>> Good bye AB! >>>>> >>>> Or as they say, we vote with our feet :-) >>> I interviewed with AB (Rockwell) a couple of years ago. They had a >>> firewall between their software, firmware, and hardware groups. The >>> FPGA folks were in the firmware group along with the embedded software >>> types, which turned me off completely (LM was the same). There didn't >>> look to be much communication between the groups, either. It wouldn't >>> surprise me if the hardware and software organizations had their own >>> P&L spreadsheets too. Nuts. >> >> In defense companies you have to do that for security reasons. There >> will be firewalls even between individual hardware groups. I don't think >> that they split P&L. > > Sure, different customers, different contracts. This was a firewall > between groups working on the same product. The hardware people > didn't seem to talk to (or even know much about) the firmware people; > "they're over there, somewhere". I can't imagine how one can firewall > FPGA designers from the hardware designers, but they did. Crazy. > In defense you must do that, with people working on the very same project. The reason is that the number of people who have access to every detail of a project must be kept low, ideally zero. This reduces the chance of a serious leak, big time. >> But in a non-defense setting that would make no sense at all. > > Even in a defense setting, firmware and hardware sorta go together. I > did both but only because the hardware developer mucked it up so bad > (I found out when I was going through the design trying to figure out > what I had to control). OTOH, the (embedded) firmware people didn't > know too much about FPGA stuff, yet may manager was the OS guy. I had a situation where I got tired and wanted a candy bar. But not this sugary stuff from our machine. So the only way to get a trail mix type of candy bar was to send coins through the internal mail thingie and someone from the other group sent back a candy bar. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
From: krw on 30 Dec 2009 20:55
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 17:25:50 -0800, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >krw wrote: >> On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 16:50:42 -0800, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> >> wrote: >> >>> krw wrote: >>>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 15:09:10 -0800, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Jamie wrote: >>>>>> Joerg wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Joel Koltner wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Joerg" <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:7pt6ptFvehU1(a)mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> From August this year: >>>>>>>>> http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2009/08/tektronix_exports_manufacturin.html >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "However, Culp said profit margins were high and the pipeline of new >>>>>>>> products was strong." >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Those high profit margins are one of the things that's killing them. >>>>>>>> If you're just re-badging Chinese-engineered and manufactured scopes >>>>>>>> and what-not at the low- to mid-end of equipment, why should the >>>>>>>> customer hand over high profit margins when, e.g., Instek is >>>>>>>> perfectly happy to make do with less? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Bingo! Which is why I chose Instek. Plus it had more sample memory and >>>>>>> features, for less money. Now clients of mine are buying those as well >>>>>>> ... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Last time a client asked me whether they also sold a LabView driver >>>>>>> for theirs. "No, they don't sell one, you just download it for free >>>>>>> just like the PC control software." ... "Oh, really?" >>>>>>> >>>>>> Which is why I see people like Allen Bradley, soon to join those like Tek! >>>>>> It's totally ridiculous with their hardware pricing on top of their >>>>>> software pricing and licensing.. >>>>>> >>>>>> What are they? Hardware or Microsoft? >>>>>> >>>>>> As far as I'm concerned, they are an industrial hardware manufacturer >>>>>> and the software to configure their electronics should be supplied as a >>>>>> free tool or maybe enough to pay for the materials at best. >>>>>> >>>>>> It seems to me with the lack of any recent advancement in hardware, I >>>>>> think all they want to do is have an office and just >>>>>> sell software that requires no employees, because they can get the code >>>>>> written in India and charge you dearly for the use of it! It's like >>>>>> paying rent on a program which isn't cheap! >>>>>> >>>>>> It used to be you had a one time payment and they gave you a key or >>>>>> what ever for one computer, now, they make you pay over and over because >>>>>> your license runs out. >>>>>> >>>>>> Just another fine example of greed! We are now buying Omron >>>>>> electronics because they are worth the money, software is great and >>>>>> reasonable. Also looking into other avenues. >>>>>> >>>>>> Good bye AB! >>>>>> >>>>> Or as they say, we vote with our feet :-) >>>> I interviewed with AB (Rockwell) a couple of years ago. They had a >>>> firewall between their software, firmware, and hardware groups. The >>>> FPGA folks were in the firmware group along with the embedded software >>>> types, which turned me off completely (LM was the same). There didn't >>>> look to be much communication between the groups, either. It wouldn't >>>> surprise me if the hardware and software organizations had their own >>>> P&L spreadsheets too. Nuts. >>> >>> In defense companies you have to do that for security reasons. There >>> will be firewalls even between individual hardware groups. I don't think >>> that they split P&L. >> >> Sure, different customers, different contracts. This was a firewall >> between groups working on the same product. The hardware people >> didn't seem to talk to (or even know much about) the firmware people; >> "they're over there, somewhere". I can't imagine how one can firewall >> FPGA designers from the hardware designers, but they did. Crazy. >> > >In defense you must do that, with people working on the very same >project. The reason is that the number of people who have access to >every detail of a project must be kept low, ideally zero. This reduces >the chance of a serious leak, big time. Nope. Not at all. I had no security clearance but had access to the hardware and FPGA stuff, though I wasn't supposed to be working on the hardware. ...and my managers were the managers of the software group. All of the FPGA people (in this project, anyway) worked for the software managers. The AB situation was similar but there was no defense work going on there. Just a screwy (product) management structure. >>> But in a non-defense setting that would make no sense at all. >> >> Even in a defense setting, firmware and hardware sorta go together. I >> did both but only because the hardware developer mucked it up so bad >> (I found out when I was going through the design trying to figure out >> what I had to control). OTOH, the (embedded) firmware people didn't >> know too much about FPGA stuff, yet may manager was the OS guy. > > >I had a situation where I got tired and wanted a candy bar. But not this >sugary stuff from our machine. So the only way to get a trail mix type >of candy bar was to send coins through the internal mail thingie and >someone from the other group sent back a candy bar. Did they get a cut? ;-) |