Free Serial Analyzer Review
Destiny Olatunji
Anyone who has used a NanoVNA will feel at home in the tinySA interface. Calibration of the tinySA is done via the built-in signal generator, more on that below. Calibration itself is simple: hook the jumper coax between the two SMA jacks and select LEVEL CAL from the configuration menu. The calibration then proceeds automatically. The same menu offers a self-test function too, which cycles through a series of ten tests that take about 15 seconds to complete.
IMSAI Guy has a LONG series on youTube covering the TinySA, the good, the bad, and the ugly. Well worth the watch if you want to know about the device, see it compared to some heavy iron on the bench, see how and why it is used, and get a fel for the good, the bad, and the ugly.
It looks awesome for the price, but, the main thing I want an SA for is to look at sources that are emitting noise, and ambient noise. The more expensive GQ electronics version also has magnetic and electric field data, which makes it far more interesting to me.
A few products with direct supervision and onsite QA are built to higher standards. Unfortunately, the NanoVNA copies and the copies of the TinySA fall into the poor quality realm. To call these copies precision instruments is quite laughable. However, they may be useful for very casual measurements, fooling people who have no idea how to validate the results they see on the display. Because, of course, if a device shows you something, it must be precisely correct, right?
Nevertheless, this turning a spectrum analyzer into a oscilloscope is very useful if you want to see the modulation time domain waveform of an RF signal, especially when the RF signal is at a frequency much higher than what your normal oscilloscope is capable of measuring.
hell i could never afford an hp or other lab quality spectrum analyzers, but i can surely afford a tinysa! and for the 64 bucks delivered it is probably the best 64 bucks i have ever spent on a piece of test equipment!
I have extensive experience with China, both as a project manager on petrochemical projects and equipment supply. Chinese Products can be good or bad. The main issue is quality control, there are many US companies that manufacture things in China and the only way to insure you are getting what you specified is to have your own QA/QC people on site.
Critical Warning (16562): Review the Power Analyzer report file (.pow.rpt) to ensure your design is within the maximum power utilization limit of the single power-supply target device and to avoid functional failures.
I have not found a proper way of getting rid of it, other than suppression. All our FPGA projects are automatically compiled and tested every night and every time changes are checked in. The build-server is set to fail builds with critical warnings, so we need to remove them. Only adding them to the .srf file seems like a "quick and dirty" workaround. Any better ways of dealing with this warning? Some way of "checking off" that the power report has been reviewed and is ok, rather than just ignoring the warning?
Most of our designs will live for a long time (typ 10+ years of maintenance). There is no guarantee that the same designers are still here in 10 years, and it is not a given that someone new 10 years from now will understand why, or even notice that there is a critical warning being ignored.
With other critical warnings, e.g. timing - given proper constraints, if someone down the road does something "stupid", the build fails on "critical warning - timing not met", and whoever made the "stupid" change would have to deal with it right away, which is fairly easy since one would only need to analyze changes made during the last 24hr.
Intel does not verify all solutions, including but not limited to any file transfers that may appear in this community. Accordingly, Intel disclaims all express and implied warranties, including without limitation, the implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement, as well as any warranty arising from course of performance, course of dealing, or usage in trade.
I am preparing for the security review. I have resolved all issues from Checkmarx and I have resolved almost all the errors from the Salesforce Code Analyzer report. There are only 6 items left from the design category.
First, they're likely not false positives. You probably have some complicated code that could be refactored to minimize the complexity of your code. However, that said, design category warnings won't fail a security review. These are informational messages that your code is complicated, but not a security concern. There's no need to report these in the false positive documentation.
The Pro 8 supports logic levels between 1.2 V and 5.5 V for digital signals, with user-selectable threshold voltages. In analog mode, the input voltage range is -10 V to +10V. Analog signals are captured at 12-bit resolution.
The Logic is so small and light, it can get lost on a desk, or pulled off the desk by the weight of the cables attached to it. This is one instance where Saleae may have too much of a good thing, and a bit of extra size and weight might be welcome.
Digital and analog sample rates can be adjusted independently, and the total capture length is also selectable. Unused channels can be turned off. In general, the fewer channels that are used, the higher the sampling rate that the Logic Pro 8 can achieve.
If I were Saleae, I would bring back the original Logic and Logic 16 models, selling them alongside the new models. The original models are both good logic analyzers, representing different cost vs performance tradeoffs than those offered by the current models. And I would cut the price of the Logic Pro 8 to $299, to make it more competitive with the rest of the product lineup.
Would be interesting to also see a review of the 16 channel DSlogic which way cheaper at $99 and has similar sampling rate (as well as support for external clock and trigger). A basic oscilloscope extension is also available.
Great review. I was considering getting the new Saleae product, but held back due to the price tag. In the past I used a Papillio One FPGA dev board with an input buffer wing as a LA. Not a great experience. The OLS software is pretty flaky and development looks stalled. The buffer size was tiny (maybe 64K?)
By the way, I own two original Logics an a Logic Pro 16. Could not live without them (which is why I have two Logics; They are so small I lost the first one for quite some time). The reason why I bought a Logic Pro 16 was to support their good behavior. When one of my original Logics stopped working, after a little bit of on the phone trouble shooting, they just send me a new one overnight, and even paid for the return shipping for the dead one. Without even asking how old it was. I took it apart to look inside, and it appeared that I was the culprit; killing it with a ground loop (trying to conduct amps of current through the ground in the USB cable).
No serial number in hardware, no encrypted bootloader, etc. It makes me wonder if they did any of that in the new hardware, or if they are just relying on a head start before the new counterfeits arrive.
After you enable IAM Access Analyzer, the next step is to review any findings to determine whether the access identified in the finding is intentional or unintentional. You can also review findings to determine similar findings for access that is intended, and then create an archive rule to automatically archive those findings. You can also review archived and resolved findings.
Choose Resolved to view only findings that were generated by the analyzer that have been resolved. When you remediate the issue that generated the finding, the finding status is changed to Resolved.
Choose External access and then choose the external access analyzer from the View analyzer dropdown. The Findings page for external access analyzers displays the following details about the shared resource and policy statement that generated the finding:
The condition from the policy statement that grants the access. For example, if the Condition field includes Source VPC, it means that the resource is shared with a principal that has access to the VPC listed. Conditions can be global or service-specific. Global condition keys have the aws: prefix.
Choose Unused access and then choose the unused access analyzer from the View analyzer dropdown. The Findings page for unused access analyzers displays the following details about the IAM entity that generated the finding:
All of the devices were tested by up to five different MyGolfSpy writers. In addition to this field testing, I tested each device against FlightScope to judge the accuracy of the data that was produced.
Similar to last year, we have produced two charts. The first gives some broad information about features, price, and compatibility. The second gives you letter grades in each of four categories, plus an overall score. Below, you will see full explanations of each grade for each device.
One area that I intentionally ignored was Price/Value. Price may be a determining factor for some people, but I came to the conclusion that it was best to judge each device purely on what it does and let the individual consumer decide what was the best bang for their buck.
Overall: Swing Smart is the most refined device in this category. Where others have added new features, Swing Smart has opted for perfecting the motion capture that powers the whole thing. Swing Smart still has virtues that set it apart, training mode and ease of use to name two, but its competitors have cut that list down. While Swing Smart is still in the discussion for the best device in this segment, it is not the first and last word in that discussion like it was last year.
Note: I evaluated the new iPad app which differs from the app available for iPhone and Android at the time of publication. I was told the Android tablet update is coming next, followed by iPhone and Android phone.