Hacker News Reader

Comment by computator | Hacker News Reader

The HP 185A oscilloscope[1], 500 MHz bandwidth, was $2000 in their 1960 catalog[2]. That would be $22,000 in today's dollars. (The brochure doesn't say MHz but uses MC meaning megacycles.) It would be fun to compare the specs to a cheap hobbyist level scope today.

[1] https://hparchive.com/Brochures/HP-185A-Brochure.pdf

[2] https://hparchive.com/Catalogs/HP-Catalog-1960-Short-Revised...

View on HN

I’m sure someone has done this, but it would be interesting to study the overall tech landscape and compare which technology has sort of retained its value, depreciated, or increased in value—and how long those phases take. Even as far back as things like cast-iron printing presses and such. I mean also value in terms of usage not necessarily monetary.

The cycles we go through where a new tech supplants an old one, people thinking it’s the way of the future, and the old processes maybe forgotten for a while. Some might come back, others completely obsolescent. Still others the old tech might be superior to new—but more expensive (like old hard-wood window panes) and not sustainable.

Historically, technology has been deflationary.

I remember finding HeNe laser interferometers in an old HP catalogue from the '70s and being surprised that buying the equivalent system today from KeySight actually costs much more, even adjusted for inflation.

Interesting—I guess build quality and certain technologies that don’t change much makes supply-and-demand takes over.

I think I have this scope or a very similar one. I got it for free from someone else. (currently in storage.) It's a great hobbyist scope although mine doesn't have a DFT function which can be annoying. I've been borrowing a friend's modern digital scope when I've needed one. I think he only paid a few hundred for it. It's a little faster and has some more modern functions.

EDIT: Oops nope. Looked at the model number rather than the brochure. That's definitely an older analog scope while mine is digital.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com