>
> Hi Tony,
>
> I don't mean to throw shade on your HP 1630 or your K100 ... just in my own
> personal opinion, when I see a HP 1630 on eBay for $100 or a HP 1660 on
> eBay for $100 ... and you see this all the time ... I think going with the
Of course. And I my comments are my personal opinion
Hi Tony,
I don't mean to throw shade on your HP 1630 or your K100 ... just in my own
personal opinion, when I see a HP 1630 on eBay for $100 or a HP 1660 on
eBay for $100 ... and you see this all the time ... I think going with the
1660 is the better deal ... you do make a good point about schemat
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Sean Caron wrote:
> * Generally anything the "C" can do, the "B" can do and vice versa.
The 16500C can accept the 16533A and 16534A DSO options, while the
16500B cannot.
The 16500A, B, C, 16600 series, 16700 series, and 16900 series each
support different subsets
Yes, the documentation of the HP 1630 series is phenomenal.
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 1:52 PM, tony duell wrote:
>
> > * The HP 16500B and 16500C use a different '030 based logic board and
> also
> [...]
> > * Generally anything the "C" can do, the "B" can do and vice versa. The
> big
> > differen
> * The HP 16500B and 16500C use a different '030 based logic board and also
[...]
> * Generally anything the "C" can do, the "B" can do and vice versa. The big
> difference between the two is that they switched from HP-HIL peripherals on
> the "B" to standard PS/2 peripherals on the "C", if you w
Hi Ken,
I think that's a pretty good overview but just wanted to add a few notes:
* The HP16500A (obsolete) ran completely from (DS/DD) floppies. There were
two drives; one in front and one in back. The 16500A is capable of running
only a limited subset of cards that were ultimately produced for
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 2:01 PM, Ken Seefried wrote:
> Thanks for the input everyone. In summary, I got recommendations for:
>
> - HP 16500C (lesser a 16500B, but not a 16500A) (mainframe)
> - HP 16700/16900/17500 (mainframe, bigger-faster-stronger, still pretty
> expensive, can use 16500 cards)
One thing on which I must disagree: you don't need 'an external HPIB
controller' to use the HP 1630. It's nice to be able to save configs and
traces to floppy, but I don't know if the PC software to actually move it
to a host for analysis has survived. I've never controlled my 1630G with
anything
Thanks for the input everyone. In summary, I got recommendations for:
- HP 16500C (lesser a 16500B, but not a 16500A) (mainframe)
- HP 16700/16900/17500 (mainframe, bigger-faster-stronger, still pretty
expensive, can use 16500 cards)
- HP 166x or 167x (portable, modern, look for hard drive)
- HP
I've got to go with Alexandre on this, look for an HP 16500B or 16500C or
if you want something smaller, an HP 166x or 1670x. You should be able to
find a nice one in good shape with all the pod cables, break-outs,
"grippies" ... a "full backpack" for a few hundred dollars or less.
An HP 165x in n
Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 22:53:07 -0400
>> From: Ken Seefried
>> To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
>> Subject: OT: Looking for the Tek 465 of Logic Analysers
>> Message-ID:
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>>
>> Maybe only semi-OT. I'm working
2015 22:53:07 -0400
> From: Ken Seefried
> To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
> Subject: OT: Looking for the Tek 465 of Logic Analysers
> Message-ID:
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Maybe only semi-OT. I'm working on a couple of classiccmp-ish projects
> That's good to hear.
> 2 weeks ago I got an HP1630D and last week a 1631.
> Both came with pods, but the first one did not have the "plug"
> with the test leads, and the second one did. So I bought the second
The actual pods, which are plugged into the back of the instrument are
quite complex a
but they were great.
- Henk
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
From: Ian S. King
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 9:32 PM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: Looking for the Tek 465 of Logic Analysers
I'm quite fond of my HP 1630G. It's quite fast enough for
>
> I'm quite fond of my HP 1630G. It's quite fast enough for the sort of
> machines I'm logic-analyzing. :-)
Ditto. Well, I can't remember which model I was given, it's the one that's
maxed out with
'state' channels, but only the basic 'timing' channels.
The manual is excellent (and availa
I'm quite fond of my HP 1630G. It's quite fast enough for the sort of
machines I'm logic-analyzing. :-)
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 5:57 PM, Ken Seefried wrote:
> From: tony duell
> >> - No weird technologies in the design (all TTL/CMOS logic)
> >
> >That is going to be a problem. AFAIK no 'serio
From: tony duell
>> - No weird technologies in the design (all TTL/CMOS logic)
>
>That is going to be a problem. AFAIK no 'serious' logic analyser was all
>TTL or (high speed) CMOS. If you are looking for one that is mostly/all
>standard logic, I think you have to consider ECL here.
I meant I'm n
)
Meu site: http://www.tabalabs.com.br
Meu blog: http://tabajara-labs.blogspot.com
- Original Message -
From: "Ken Seefried"
To:
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2015 11:53 PM
Subject: OT: Looking for the Tek 465 of Logic Analysers
Maybe only semi-OT. I'm working on a coup
> From: Jon Elson
> On 05/28/2015 09:53 PM, Ken Seefried wrote:
>> Ease of finding complete kit; nothing worse than dropping a dime on
>> what looks like a good deal only to find you're missing the unobtanium
>> cable
> The Tek 1240 should work.
I can second that. I rec
>
> Maybe only semi-OT. I'm working on a couple of classiccmp-ish projects
> (6303, 6309 and 68030) and I find the trusty old Tek 465 o-scope is no
> longer compensating for my lack of design skill (or I'm getting better at
> hiding bugs in my designs, depending how you look at it). I'm looking
On 05/28/2015 09:53 PM, Ken Seefried wrote:
Maybe only semi-OT. I'm working on a couple of classiccmp-ish projects
(6303, 6309 and 68030) and I find the trusty old Tek 465 o-scope is no
longer compensating for my lack of design skill (or I'm getting better at
hiding bugs in my designs, dependin
Maybe only semi-OT. I'm working on a couple of classiccmp-ish projects
(6303, 6309 and 68030) and I find the trusty old Tek 465 o-scope is no
longer compensating for my lack of design skill (or I'm getting better at
hiding bugs in my designs, depending how you look at it). I'm looking for
a recom
22 matches
Mail list logo
