Turn your Rigol DS1052E Oscilloscope into a 100MHz DS1102E
in [Design]
|
From: terryc on 31 Mar 2010 22:55 On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 08:21:21 -0700, Muzaffer Kal wrote: > On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 14:44:14 +0100, "Nial Stewart" > <nial*REMOVE_THIS*@nialstewartdevelopments.co.uk> wrote: > >>I was going to type out a lengthy reply but you're obviously not open to >>reasoned debate. >> >>Would you accuse AMD of 'outright theft' for selling 4 core processors >>as 3 core processors? >> >>http://www.guru3d.com/news/phenom-ii-x3--enable-the-4th-core/ >> >> > The difference there is that you don't have access to AMD's > verification/test suite which shows some of the functionality on one of > the cores as broken so it would be marked as bad and disabled. It is > certainly the same die as the 4 core processor but it may not have > passed all the tests. AFAIK, this is what CASIO did with their calculators.
From: John Larkin on 31 Mar 2010 23:10 On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 02:53:24 +0000 (UTC), terryc <newsninespam-spam(a)woa.com.au> wrote: >On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:49:53 -0700, John Larkin wrote: > >> It may be illegal to use a computer to hack firmware if it >> deprives the IP owner of revenue. > >There in lies your problem; prior publication. The IP owner has nil >chance of proving that his IP doesn't rely on someone else's IP. That is >how the whole process of technical development has taken place. The >concept that some brilliant individual created something new is 99% >bullshit. I've never met any programmer who is totally self taught >without recourse to any example(someone else's IP). > It's your IP if you copyright it. And it's easy to copyright code. John
From: Glenn Gundlach on 31 Mar 2010 23:20 On Mar 31, 1:02 am, "George Jefferson" <Geo...(a)Jefferson.com> wrote: > > It's also very dishonest and goes to show why humanity will never make it > very far. People like Larkin are too arrogant to understand this. Do you > think people would buy their products if they knew that the only difference > between the low end and high end versions is the price? At the very least > they could have added some true functional improvement that made it > justifiable but simply changing the model number doesn't justify a 40% price > increase. What is dishonest about it? You buy a product to do a job and it's worth a price to you. You want more bells and whistles, you pay for them. If they're in there already, how is that dishonest? I think is smart engineering. I never understand why it's OK for me to get the highest price when I sell something but it's 'bad' and 'greedy' if a company does the same thing. Don't tell me you sold you house to the lowest offer -- or maybe you did. G²
From: Glenn Gundlach on 31 Mar 2010 23:45 On Mar 31, 11:23 am, John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: <snip > > The scopes are not identical because they have different specs and > firmware. Just like versions of Windows, or GPS units, or all sorts of > things have different specs and functions differentiated by firmware. > > Rigol made it too easy to hack their scope, and Jones took advantage > of it. I still don't know why. > > John I pretty much agree with you but has anybody verified that the hardware is indeed identical? They don't install a faster processor or A-D or better grade amps? Or is this like the overclocked computer that mostly works but sometimes crashes an loses data? If I want the faster computer, I don't fool with the clocks, I buy what I want. I would do the same with the scope. G²
From: Glenn Gundlach on 31 Mar 2010 23:54
On Mar 31, 2:30 pm, "fritz" <yapu...(a)microsoft.com> wrote: > "John Larkin" <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message > > news:mtq6r5t2e14htcdl9svbr3bt8g95hlpmmc(a)4ax.com... > ..... > > > Looking at the transient response at 100 MHz, which kinda sucks, I > > wonder if the 50 and 100 MHz scopes are indeed identical except for > > firmware. > > > John > > Kinda sucks ? > Did you watch the eevblog ??? I don't think you have the slightest clue > about > what fast signals really look like. The higher the bandwidth the messier > they look as various resonance effects in the measurement circuit > are revealed - use a 1Ghz 'scope and they REALLY suck. > The modded Rigol compared very well with a 100Mhz Tektronix TDS 1012. You're telling Larkin about high speed? What planet are YOU from? G² |