At 12:54 PM 6/7/97 +0930, you wrote: >> From: Andrew Russell Morris >> To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU >> Subject: Re: FPGA/CPLD, Oscilloscope, Books, and serial port >> Date: Saturday, 7 June 1997 10:53 > > > >>. You could build a little box to improve the input attenuator, and >> the trigger level, but I didn't. I bought a Tektronix TDS 220 instead. >That >> is a real nice little oscilloscope! > >Did you compare with the Fluke / Phillips in the same price range? I'd be >interested in your comments, as I'm looking at this bracket of digitals. > >MikeS > > I looked at the Fluke Scopemeter and I liked the user interface of the TEK better. I use TEK digital scopes at work and I'm confortable with them. Digital knobs are faster to operate than buttons and I think the buttons would wear out faster. The Fluke had similar performance for the price. I don't need battery operation, but the portability is very nice. The TEK is not battery operated but they have one for several hundred dollars more. The form factor of the TEK is better suited to bench use and the form factor of the Fluke is better suited to handheld use. A coworker of mine uses and does not like the Fluke Scopmeter. Newer ones may be better, but he says that is not very user friendly. The TEK is very easy to use, especially if you're used to the other Tek scopes. At $995, I think the 60MHz TDS 210 is the best deal on the market. The 100MHz TDS 220 (mine) lists for $1695. I paid the extra money, because I needed a digital scope for my consulting work and the dealer was out of the TDS 210. TV repairmen are snapping them up as fast as they can get them in. I'm sure the extra bandwith will come in handy sometime. That is literally the only difference between the TDS 210 and the TDS 220.