Sounds fantastic.

1. =A0For several probe based versions you could consider eg IR pulse
for sync. Heath Robinsonish, but may be workable up to some limit.

2. Bit it seems that it's trying to do one thing because of the
gee-whizz factor that isn't strictly necessary, and that adversely
affects the whole design - which is the "fit it all in the scope probe
body". That's a great wow-factor objective, but what are the costs of
doing that ($, facilities, flexibility / limitations), and what real
advantages does it gain?

Adding a (boring, like everyone else has) intermediate box

- allows size to be as small as possible and as large as necessary.

- allows multiple channels to share the same USB port if desired and
thus solves the sync problem.

- allows standard scope probes to be used, dearer/better or
worse/cheaper as suited to user.

- allows specialist probes such as high voltage or super rugged etc.

- almost certainly lowers rather than raises the total cost.

- Allows some knobs for real men [tm] to twiddle if wanted.

- Allows optional standalone screen add on (so does small version really)

- Larger - I would lose it less often

Pros of in probe version:

- Smaller :-)

- Gee Whizz factor

- Pocketability is great, but eg my HP mini sets something like the
lowest size system I'd use it with so absolute smallness is not an
absolute advantage.



Russell

-- =

http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist