why do they still make analog oscilloscopes

[electronics man]

Ok but there is still a lot a DSO can do that an analog scope can't. Analog scopes are for people who have very specific needs DSOs are more general purpose and much better for the hobbiest. What's ther aversion to DSOs all about? 

[Fsck]

Ok but there is still a lot a DSO can do that an analog scope can't. Analog scopes are for people who have very specific needs DSOs are more general purpose and much better for the hobbiest. What's ther aversion to DSOs all about? 

it's not an aversion. you're correct, DSOs can do many things analog scopes cannot. however, at the moment, an old (undoubtedly used) analog scope $ for $ is often superior to a new digital scope and cost is typically the major factor for hobbyists.

the cheapest bang for buck DSO is currently what? the 1074z from Rigol I'm guessing with an entry price of >500$
the best general purpose bang for buck analog scope is probably the 2465 series which can be acquired for 300-500$.

to get a dso that is clearly superior to the 2465 series requires a fairly large jump in cost, however repair and maintenance will of course be a concern with old analog scopes.

[vk6zgo]

Ok but there is still a lot a DSO can do that an analog scope can't. Analog scopes are for people who have very specific needs DSOs are more general purpose and much better for the hobbiest. What's ther aversion to DSOs all about? 

In my experience the reverse is the case.

DSOs have promised much for many years,& only recently have they delivered on that promise.
Earlier generations were very "clunky" in operation,so they were only appropriate for some work where their particular characteristics were useful.

[electronics man]

Ok but there is still a lot a DSO can do that an analog scope can't. Analog scopes are for people who have very specific needs DSOs are more general purpose and much better for the hobbiest. What's ther aversion to DSOs all about? 

In my experience the reverse is the case.

DSOs have promised much for many years,& only recently have they delivered on that promise.
Earlier generations were very "clunky" in operation,so they were only appropriate for some work where their particular characteristics were useful.

It's not the case any more, I don't have much money so I wanted an oscilloscope that does as much as possible and that takes up as little room as possible and a device that doesn't limit what I can do very much so I went for a DSO, as my requirement meant I had to catch runt pulses and look at noise. You can't do either of these with a CRO

[vk6zgo]

Ok but there is still a lot a DSO can do that an analog scope can't. Analog scopes are for people who have very specific needs DSOs are more general purpose and much better for the hobbiest. What's ther aversion to DSOs all about? 

In my experience the reverse is the case.

DSOs have promised much for many years,& only recently have they delivered on that promise.
Earlier generations were very "clunky" in operation,so they were only appropriate for some work where their particular characteristics were useful.

It's not the case any more, I don't have much money so I wanted an oscilloscope that does as much as possible and that takes up as little room as possible and a device that doesn't limit what I can do very much so I went for a DSO, as my requirement meant I had to catch runt pulses and look at noise. You can't do either of these with a CRO

"Runt" pulses,no.but noise?------What do think we used before DSOs existed?
And this wasn't just in a home Lab,but in Industry,where it had to work!

Hypothetical:- You have a pulse train at around 15kHz PRF.
High frequency components are up to 5MHz.
You need to see if your signal has 50Hz hum on it.

What does your display look like when you are set to around 5ms/div to show the hum?
Many modern DSOs can do this,but some can't,as their sampling rate reduces,giving aliasing problems.

None of the early generation DSOs could do it-----all CROs made since around 1947 can!

[David Hess]

It's not the case any more, I don't have much money so I wanted an oscilloscope that does as much as possible and that takes up as little room as possible and a device that doesn't limit what I can do very much so I went for a DSO, as my requirement meant I had to catch runt pulses and look at noise. You can't do either of these with a CRO

"Runt" pulses,no.but noise?------What do think we used before DSOs existed?
And this wasn't just in a home Lab,but in Industry,where it had to work!

Hypothetical:- You have a pulse train at around 15kHz PRF.
High frequency components are up to 5MHz.
You need to see if your signal has 50Hz hum on it.

What does your display look like when you are set to around 5ms/div to show the hum?
Many modern DSOs can do this,but some can't,as their sampling rate reduces,giving aliasing problems.

None of the early generation DSOs could do it-----all CROs made since around 1947 can!

Would you consider the 2230 or 2232 early generation?  They could certainly do it but would be useless for quantifying noise unless a peak-to-peak measurement was acceptable but a lot of modern DSOs have the same limitation.

[electronics man]

Ok but there is still a lot a DSO can do that an analog scope can't. Analog scopes are for people who have very specific needs DSOs are more general purpose and much better for the hobbiest. What's ther aversion to DSOs all about? 

In my experience the reverse is the case.

DSOs have promised much for many years,& only recently have they delivered on that promise.
Earlier generations were very "clunky" in operation,so they were only appropriate for some work where their particular characteristics were useful.

It's not the case any more, I don't have much money so I wanted an oscilloscope that does as much as possible and that takes up as little room as possible and a device that doesn't limit what I can do very much so I went for a DSO, as my requirement meant I had to catch runt pulses and look at noise. You can't do either of these with a CRO

"Runt" pulses,no.but noise?------What do think we used before DSOs existed?
And this wasn't just in a home Lab,but in Industry,where it had to work!

Hypothetical:- You have a pulse train at around 15kHz PRF.
High frequency components are up to 5MHz.
You need to see if your signal has 50Hz hum on it.

What does your display look like when you are set to around 5ms/div to show the hum?
Many modern DSOs can do this,but some can't,as their sampling rate reduces,giving aliasing problems.

None of the early generation DSOs could do it-----all CROs made since around 1947 can!

Other high frequency noise? What about pass/ fail?

[vk6zgo]

Ok but there is still a lot a DSO can do that an analog scope can't. Analog scopes are for people who have very specific needs DSOs are more general purpose and much better for the hobbiest. What's ther aversion to DSOs all about? 

In my experience the reverse is the case.

DSOs have promised much for many years,& only recently have they delivered on that promise.
Earlier generations were very "clunky" in operation,so they were only appropriate for some work where their particular characteristics were useful.

It's not the case any more, I don't have much money so I wanted an oscilloscope that does as much as possible and that takes up as little room as possible and a device that doesn't limit what I can do very much so I went for a DSO, as my requirement meant I had to catch runt pulses and look at noise. You can't do either of these with a CRO

"Runt" pulses,no.but noise?------What do think we used before DSOs existed?
And this wasn't just in a home Lab,but in Industry,where it had to work!

Hypothetical:- You have a pulse train at around 15kHz PRF.
High frequency components are up to 5MHz.
You need to see if your signal has 50Hz hum on it.

What does your display look like when you are set to around 5ms/div to show the hum?
Many modern DSOs can do this,but some can't,as their sampling rate reduces,giving aliasing problems.

None of the early generation DSOs could do it-----all CROs made since around 1947 can!

Other high frequency noise? What about pass/ fail?

OK.just pointing out that noise can be low frequency,too!

High frequency noise is no problem.
Pass/fail?--we were expected to be able to read p-p noise & check it against a specification,although there were pass/fail graticules for noise.
If the noise signal is substantially sinusoidal,a good estimate can also be made of its RMS value.
If it is fairly close to white noise,a substitution method can get a fairly accurate result.

DSOs are very useful for repetitive testing,but such tests were done with analog 'scopes for many years.