
Oscilloscope watch - anigbrowl
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/920064946/oscilloscope-watch?ref=card
======
ohazi
Oscilloscope Specifications:

Maximum Sampling rate: 4MSPS

Analog Bandwidth: ---> 200kHz <\---

Arbitrary Waveform Generator Specifications

Maximum conversion rate: 1MSPS

Analog Bandwidth: ---> 50kHz <\---

This is certainly not the first project in the "super miniaturized hardware
tools" category, and as much as I like the idea of having a single tricorder-
like device that can replace a lab full of hardware, all of the similar
projects that I've seen have fallen short in exactly the same way: analog
bandwidth - the one spec that actually matters.

I would pay a _lot_ of money for a miniaturized tool that took RF performance
seriously.

~~~
DanBC
What analogue bandwidth do you want? Does the device need to have a display,
or is a USB device ok?

~~~
ohazi
I actually prefer the USB scopes. I paid a lot for a high resolution laptop
display, and I'm going to have that with me anyway.

At work, I'm generally okay with a 400-500 MHz bandwidth for some of the more
fiddly stuff. At home, 100 MHz is usually plenty, although I've occasionally
had to take parts of my projects to the lab.

I'll concede that many hobbyists don't really need all of this capability
(e.g. the Arduino + LED crowd), but I'd have a really hard time recommending a
scope that doesn't do at least 100 MHz simply because you can already get 100
MHz hardware for dirt cheap.

It's gotten significantly easier for hobbyists to play with relatively high-
end hardware that would have been out of reach a decade ago (FPGAs, fast
memory, wired/wireless communication ICs, cameras, etc). A lot of this
hardware requires relatively high bandwidth interconnects to work well (or to
work at all), but today's hobbyists seem undeterred and are figuring out how
to make it work.

But when the shit hits the fan, you don't want to be banging your head against
the wall because of crappy test hardware.

------
beloch
I had a calculator watch as a kid. Great idea, but not terribly useful due to
poor ergonomics. Still, it undeniably had appeal. This is like a calculator
watch for a new decade, but also for a greatly reduced audience (Fewer people
use oscilloscopes than calculators). This doesn't seem likely to find much of
an audience unfortunately, but a part of me still wants one!

------
techwizrd
This looks really handy. I know they're working on the design, but it would
definitely need to be a lot more ergonomic and more attractive. I also hope
they improve the buttons and the size/contrast of the text. If the watch
buttons are anything like typical watch buttons, extended operation of the
oscilloscope will be really annoying.

------
__david__
This is bulky and unattractive, but man I want one.

------
ja27
I've met Gabriel at a few Mini Maker Faires and have one of his XProtoLab
boards. It isn't a replacement for a real oscilloscope, but it is a fun tool
to always have around.

------
ruslan
Max sampling rate (4MSPS) is too small. Note that for more or less proper
measurement you need at least Sampling_rate=Freq*4. So, for something real you
need 200MSPS or even more. Beside that the idea is very cool, would buy one.

Eagerly waiting for a Spectrum Analyzer Watch to pop up on Kickstarter any
time soon. :-)

~~~
ohazi
It's worse than that. The 4 MSPS doesn't do a damn thing for you when your
analog bandwidth is in the kHz. It doesn't matter how fast you sample if your
signal can't get to the sampler.

------
thearn4
Kind of a novelty, but cool. Looks like they're going to hit their goal.

------
rpenm
Just like a calculator watch, the form factor is too small to interact with.
And the analog bandwidth is too low. And I can't think of any actual use cases
for this product.

But yeah, the little kid in me wants one.

------
reustle
If I remember correctly, he was selling these screens at Maker Faire NYC last
year. They are a lot of fun, and he is a really nice guy!

------
nephorider
It's not beautiful but it is likely a fun little cool object

