[pvarangot]

"guaranteed to work for many years" if you don't need them calibrated I guess.

Also like I'm not sure? A lot of the discrete component and analog stuff on the old models is way more flimsy that the new system on a chip things on the signal path of the new instruments, specially for RF.

Plus if you need data logging it's not even worth to have the discussion on if older gear was better.

[duskwuff]

> "guaranteed to work for many years" if you don't need them calibrated I guess.

Unless you need traceability for contract or regulatory reasons, oscilloscopes don't need regular calibration. Most of the time, you're probably using them for rough visual confirmations (e.g. is this signal behaving like I expect it to) more than precise measurements. In any case, it's rare for an oscilloscope to go seriously out of whack without a physical insult (like being dropped or exposed to major overvoltage).

[analog31]

I'm pretty confident that I can check the calibration of my scope, with a DMM. I wouldn't do that if I worked in a regulated industry, but in a home lab, we make judgment calls like this all the time.

My main problem with the old analog scopes is that the controls get flakey over time. Also, I do like the measurement and data logging features.

[kevin_thibedeau]

The 2465A is actually more reliable than the B models. Newer isn't always better.