10 Jun
2015
10 Jun
'15
5:01 p.m.
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 165x (portable, older, only buy cheap, look for hard drive)
- HP 1630D, 1630G or 1631 (old, HPIB and HPIL interfaces, no special
software needed, but you apparently need be able to control it with an
external HPIB controller to get the most out of it)
- Tek 1240
- Gould Biomation K100D (software in rom, HPIB interface, assuming you need
HPIB literacy to use effectively)
- Tek DAS9200 (be careful to get the right pods (several variations), etc)
- Tek TLA710/TLA720 (PC attached, Linux capable)
General advice offered:
- Look for hard drives or no special software required for longest life.
Floppies required == bad.
- Make really sure you get probes, and the right probes, for your kit.
They're often not available separately for non-st00pid money.
- There's a crazy array of ancillary features to consider: o-scope
functions, processor assemblers/disassemblers, pattern generators,
specialized inputs/outputs, timebases, embedded Unix machines, etc. Know
what you might need.
So I've got a lot of manuals to read, but the 16500C sure looks like a ton
of bang per US$. You can even get an expansion chassis (10 additional
slots) if you need to go to ludicrous speed on the number of
probes/features.
KJ
10 Jun
10 Jun
6:18 p.m.
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 the 16500
and runs a lot slower in general ... the system is built on a straight
68000 CPU.
* The HP 16500B and 16500C use a different '030 based logic board and also
were modified to boot from an internal IDE hard drive which is fairly easy
to replace with a CF card and CF-to-IDE converter. The Startech one worked
for me in my 16500B. I think the CF conversion on the 16500 makes for a
great "no worry" situation for long instrument life.
* The software to reinstall a HP16500B/C is readily available on the Web
along with a bunch of other neat stuff for the platform ... inverse
assemblers; the symbol table utility; etc.
* 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 want to
connect an
external keyboard and mouse to use in lieu of or in conjunction with the
touch screen; depending on what you have in your stash ... I happened to
have a bunch of HIL mice and a HIL keyboard so HP-HIL on the "B" doesn't
bug me.
The "B" and "C" also support an option card that has a standard 10BT
Ethernet interface on it, so you can control it remotely via X11, and SVGA
out, so you can run an external display. Not necessary but something nice
to look out for.
* The 166x and 167x generally boot from Flash or something ... no hard
drive... except the 1664 which was sort of a low cost "value model" for the
line ... I think that boots from standard 3.5" HD floppies ... avoid that
little guy. It's not bad, but limited ... you can usually find a 1660, 1661
or 1662 for about the same price with a bit of patience.
* Pretty sure the 165x also boot from DS/DD floppies completely; no hard
drive there either, AFAIK. The 165x is the first incarnation of the
mostly-GUI interface that's later seen on the 16500, 166x, 167x and so on.
* Once they went to the 16700 ... the switched the logic board again ...
the 16700 is a little PA-RISC machine ... probably bears some relation to
the 9000/712 if I had to guess ... IIRC the interface is a little
different; more like just plain X11 running fvwm95 or something... the
interface starts to feel more like you see on a contemporary LA if you were
to go out and buy one brand new. IMO if you can find a good deal on a
16700, go for it, but it can be a little bit overkill for retrocomputing /
hobby / light embedded work.
The 16700 won't run some of the older 16500 cards, in particular, the
two-card 400 MSa DSO option, which means if you want a DSO in there, say,
you'd need to move up to the rather more expensive, 1 or 2 GSa single-card
scope options.
* IMO, the HP 1630 series and the Biomation K100 are pretty obsolescent and
... unless you already have one, or someone local to you is giving you
one... I don't think they're really worth the cost of shipping unless you
have some nostalgic attachment to a particular instrument.
I like my 1662 and 16500B quite a bit and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend
them to anyone!
HP T&M catalog and the corresponding Tek catalog ca. 1992-1998 should cover
most of these instruments in detail.
I see a few promising 16500 candidates on eBay at or around the $250 level.
They tend to come and go with a fair bit of regularity ... it pays to just
keep an eye on things for a few weeks until you see one you just can't
resist :O
Best,
Sean
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 5:01 PM, Ken Seefried <seefriek at gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks for the input everyone. In summary, I got
recommendations for:
- HP 16500C (lesser a 16500B, but not a 16500A) (mainframe)
- HP 16700/16900/17500 (mainframe, bigger-faster-stronger, still pretty
expensive, can use 16500 cards)
- HP 166x or 167x (portable, modern, look for hard drive)
- HP 165x (portable, older, only buy cheap, look for hard drive)
- HP 1630D, 1630G or 1631 (old, HPIB and HPIL interfaces, no special
software needed, but you apparently need be able to control it with an
external HPIB controller to get the most out of it)
- Tek 1240
- Gould Biomation K100D (software in rom, HPIB interface, assuming you need
HPIB literacy to use effectively)
- Tek DAS9200 (be careful to get the right pods (several variations), etc)
- Tek TLA710/TLA720 (PC attached, Linux capable)
General advice offered:
- Look for hard drives or no special software required for longest life.
Floppies required == bad.
- Make really sure you get probes, and the right probes, for your kit.
They're often not available separately for non-st00pid money.
- There's a crazy array of ancillary features to consider: o-scope
functions, processor assemblers/disassemblers, pattern generators,
specialized inputs/outputs, timebases, embedded Unix machines, etc. Know
what you might need.
So I've got a lot of manuals to read, but the 16500C sure looks like a ton
of bang per US$. You can even get an expansion chassis (10 additional
slots) if you need to go to ludicrous speed on the number of
probes/features.
KJ
12 Jun
12 Jun
4:52 p.m.
* 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 want to
connect an
external keyboard and mouse to use in lieu of or in conjunction with the
touch screen; depending on what you have in your stash ... I happened to
have a bunch of HIL mice and a HIL keyboard so HP-HIL on the "B" doesn't
bug me.
I don't know if it works on these instruments, but there was an interface to
use a quadrature mouse on an HP-HIL system.
* IMO, the HP 1630 series and the Biomation K100 are
pretty obsolescent and
... unless you already have one, or someone local to you is giving you
one... I don't think they're really worth the cost of shipping unless you
have some nostalgic attachment to a particular instrument.
As somebody who has both and uses them (and has no later analysers), I have
to disagree with you there. After all the OP was asking for the 'Tek 465 of logic
analysers' which suggests not the latest instruments. The HP1630 and Gould K100D
are easily fast enough for classic computer work (I've never had problems). They
also seem to be a lot better documented than later analysers (can you get
schematics of later HPs? I seem to remember they are not in the manuals). The
probe interface is also documented and quite simple. While I recomend only
getting a LA with the original pods, the ability to make custom pods has helped
me on several occasions. The inputs to both those LAs are simple differential
ECL signals, easy to hack about with.
-tony
5:03 p.m.
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 schematics and
repairability ... and hack-ability ... there are plenty of very exotic
looking components ... especially on the acquisition cards ... on the newer
machines that I'm sure are basically impossible to repair.
I just try to manage that risk by keeping as many spare cards on hand as I
can get for the 16500 series, and I've always got the 1662 standing by in
case something happened to it ... honestly, when you can get a HP 166x for
$100, unless you enjoy the sport of troubleshooting and repair in and of
itself (and I do so sometimes myself) is it really worth sinking much time
and effort into repairing a 1630 series, or a K100?
I just want folks to be aware ... people might not necessarily realize,
what their money will get them; I'd hate for someone to shell out for a
1630 when they could have gotten a 166x or 167x for the same price... That
almost happened to me when I was shopping around and I would have regretted
it. I'm glad I did the a little bit more background research beforehand...
No intrinsic dislike for the classic instruments; if you got em, use em! :O
Best,
Sean
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 4:52 PM, tony duell <ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk> 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
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 want to connect
an
external keyboard and mouse to use in lieu of or
in conjunction with the
touch screen; depending on what you have in your stash ... I happened to
have a bunch of HIL mice and a HIL keyboard so HP-HIL on the "B" doesn't
bug me.
I don't know if it works on these instruments, but there was an interface
to
use a quadrature mouse on an HP-HIL system.
* IMO, the HP 1630 series and the Biomation K100
are pretty obsolescent
and
... unless you already have one, or someone local
to you is giving you
one... I don't think they're really worth the cost of shipping unless you
have some nostalgic attachment to a particular instrument.
As somebody who has both and uses them (and has no later analysers), I have
to disagree with you there. After all the OP was asking for the 'Tek 465
of logic
analysers' which suggests not the latest instruments. The HP1630 and Gould
K100D
are easily fast enough for classic computer work (I've never had
problems). They
also seem to be a lot better documented than later analysers (can you get
schematics of later HPs? I seem to remember they are not in the manuals).
The
probe interface is also documented and quite simple. While I recomend only
getting a LA with the original pods, the ability to make custom pods has
helped
me on several occasions. The inputs to both those LAs are simple
differential
ECL signals, easy to hack about with.
-tony
13 Jun
13 Jun
3:53 p.m.
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 too. I think that giving
such opinions, backed up with facts (as you are certainly doing) is worthwhile.
Please don't think I am flaming you, or that I don't think your views are worth
considering.
This is classiccmp, a list for old computers. And even I (classic machine lover than
I am) will happily agree that a modern PC has a much higher CPU performance than
any of our classics. We've just had a thread on the VAX 11/730. This is probably the
slowest VAX ever, just about anything running an emulator will beat it. This does not
mean (IMHO) that the 11/730 is not worth restoring. There are many reasons for liking
classic computers, CPU speed is generally not important.
Similarly there are many (IMHO good) reasons for liking classic test gear. Provided the
limitations are known, and it is used sensibly, it will still give good results. A
100Msample/sec
logic analyser from the 1980s is still a 100Msample/sec logic analyser. It may not be
fast
enough for some modern work, it probably is fast enough for working on classic computers.
In the end I think it comes down to knowing the various instruments, the pros and cons of
each and making a choice, What you choose is ultimately up to you.
1660 is the better deal ... you do make a good point
about schematics and
repairability ... and hack-ability ... there are plenty of very exotic
looking components ... especially on the acquisition cards ... on the newer
machines that I'm sure are basically impossible to repair.
Be warned that even the HP1630 has custom ICs on the acquisition boards. AFAIK
the Gould K100D is all standard ECL parts.
For me, the reasons for choosing the K100D would be the documentation and standard
ICs. And the fact that it is easy to make custom probes for it. The reason for choosing
the HP1630 are the mostly standard ICs, the documentation, and the HPIL interface.
-tony
12 Jun
12 Jun
7:34 p.m.
Yes, the documentation of the HP 1630 series is phenomenal.
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 1:52 PM, tony duell <ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk> wrote:
--
Ian S. King, MSIS, MSCS, Ph.D. Candidate
The Information School <http://ischool.uw.edu>
Archivist, Voices From the Rwanda Tribunal <http://tribunalvoices.org>
Value Sensitive Design Research Lab <http://vsdesign.org>
University of Washington
There is an old Vulcan saying: "Only Nixon could go to China."
* 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 want to connect
an
external keyboard and mouse to use in lieu of or
in conjunction with the
touch screen; depending on what you have in your stash ... I happened to
have a bunch of HIL mice and a HIL keyboard so HP-HIL on the "B" doesn't
bug me.
I don't know if it works on these instruments, but there was an interface
to
use a quadrature mouse on an HP-HIL system.
* IMO, the HP 1630 series and the Biomation K100
are pretty obsolescent
and
... unless you already have one, or someone local
to you is giving you
one... I don't think they're really worth the cost of shipping unless you
have some nostalgic attachment to a particular instrument.
As somebody who has both and uses them (and has no later analysers), I have
to disagree with you there. After all the OP was asking for the 'Tek 465
of logic
analysers' which suggests not the latest instruments. The HP1630 and Gould
K100D
are easily fast enough for classic computer work (I've never had
problems). They
also seem to be a lot better documented than later analysers (can you get
schematics of later HPs? I seem to remember they are not in the manuals).
The
probe interface is also documented and quite simple. While I recomend only
getting a LA with the original pods, the ability to make custom pods has
helped
me on several occasions. The inputs to both those LAs are simple
differential
ECL signals, easy to hack about with.
-tony
13 Jun
13 Jun
2:17 a.m.
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Sean Caron <scaron at umich.edu> 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 of the plug-in modules. The 16700 doesn't
support any of the early 16500 series plug-ins, and the 16900 doesn't
support *any* of the 16500 plugins, nor the early 16700 plugins.
The details are in a table:
http://www.keysight.com/upload/cmc_upload/All/MainframeModuleCompatibilityM…
It's a shame that they didn't offer a CPU upgrade for the 16700/16702.
It has a 150 MHz PA-RISC, which is a step up from the 68030 of the
16500C, but is still frustratingly slow.
10 Jun
10 Jun
10:20 p.m.
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 but its front panel.
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:01 PM, Ken Seefried <seefriek at gmail.com> 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)
- HP 166x or 167x (portable, modern, look for hard drive)
- HP 165x (portable, older, only buy cheap, look for hard drive)
- HP 1630D, 1630G or 1631 (old, HPIB and HPIL interfaces, no special
software needed, but you apparently need be able to control it with an
external HPIB controller to get the most out of it)
- Tek 1240
- Gould Biomation K100D (software in rom, HPIB interface, assuming you need
HPIB literacy to use effectively)
- Tek DAS9200 (be careful to get the right pods (several variations), etc)
- Tek TLA710/TLA720 (PC attached, Linux capable)
General advice offered:
- Look for hard drives or no special software required for longest life.
Floppies required == bad.
- Make really sure you get probes, and the right probes, for your kit.
They're often not available separately for non-st00pid money.
- There's a crazy array of ancillary features to consider: o-scope
functions, processor assemblers/disassemblers, pattern generators,
specialized inputs/outputs, timebases, embedded Unix machines, etc. Know
what you might need.
So I've got a lot of manuals to read, but the 16500C sure looks like a ton
of bang per US$. You can even get an expansion chassis (10 additional
slots) if you need to go to ludicrous speed on the number of
probes/features.
KJ
--
Ian S. King, MSIS, MSCS, Ph.D. Candidate
The Information School <http://ischool.uw.edu>
Archivist, Voices From the Rwanda Tribunal <http://tribunalvoices.org>
Value Sensitive Design Research Lab <http://vsdesign.org>
University of Washington
There is an old Vulcan saying: "Only Nixon could go to China."
11 Jun
11 Jun
10:10 p.m.
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 2:01 PM, Ken Seefried <seefriek at gmail.com> 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)
- HP 166x or 167x (portable, modern, look for hard drive)
Some information and personal opinions I'll add:
If you go for a 16500B, you should find one with the optional Ethernet
interface installed. Remote control and data transfer over TCP/IP in
general may be much easier to set up than using GPIB, unless you
already have gear setup for that. With the optional Ethernet interface
the only practical difference between the 16500B and the 16500C is
that you can use common and cheap PS/2 keyboards and mice with the
16500C while you need to find more rare and expensive HP-HIL keyboards
and mice for the 16500B. Both are perfectly usable with neither a
keyboard nor mouse. The downside of a 16500 series is that the value
of the bare mainframe itself is often less than the cost to ship one.
(Hey Ian if you ever want to move up to a 16500B I have some local to
you...)
For the 16700 series if you want a self contained unit with built-in
display you need a 16702A or 16702B. The built-in LCD display is only
800x600. You can use an external monitor up to 1280x1024, or 1600x1200
with Option 003 installed. If you don't need a portable self contained
unit and have the room to set up an external monitor a 16700A or
16700B should be cheaper than a 16702A or 16702B, plus you never have
to worry about a display failing. One of the main differences between
the 16700A/16702A and the 16700B/16702B is that the B version has a
built-in SCSI CD-ROM, which comes in handy if you need to reload the
system software. Otherwise you need to find a standard external SCSI
CD-ROM drive. The 16520/16521 pattern gen modules and the
16530/16531/16532 scope modules are not supported by the 16700 series.
You need 16522 or 16720 pattern gen modules and 16533/16534 scope
modules. The 16700 series run on top of HP-UX 10.20. Once you factor
in the shipping costs a 16700 series system might not be significantly
more expensive that a 16500 series system.
One limitation of the 1660A and 1660E series is the 4K sample depth.
Depending on your application that may be a major limitation. The max
sample depth varies on the 1670 series. I believe 64K and optionally
512K on the 1670A series, 64K and optionally 1M on the 1670D series,
1M on the 1670E series, and 64K and optionally 256K or 2M on the 1670G
series. The E and G series have color LCD displays. The older series
have monochrome CRT displays.
The 16900 series are much more recent and currently a lot more
expensive. An empty 16700A might be under $100 before shipping while
an empty 16900A may be at least $500 before shipping. No 16500 series
modules are supported by the 16900 series. The minimum supported 16700
series modules are the 16740A and higher, and the 16720A pattern gen
which still sells for a premium. The 16900 series are based on Windows
XP, or maybe Windows 7 on never mainframes.
The good thing with all of these HP / Agilent analyzers is that all of
the state/timing modules from the 16510 up through the 16752 and the
1650/1660/1670 series use the same 40-pin POD breakout lead sets.
Starting with the 16753 modules they switched to the 90-pin POD
connectors and the breakout lead sets for those are crazy expensive.
3308
days inactive
3311
days old
8 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
glen.slick＠gmail.com -
isking＠uw.edu -
scaron＠umich.edu -
seefriek＠gmail.com -
spacewar＠gmail.com