Re: Copyrights, patents, costs, etc.

Miroslav Pokorni <mpokorni@...>

Phil, I sure hope you are not self employed (My own employer
is a disappointing shell). Sorry Phil, I just could not resist this dig.


Miroslav Pokorni

-----Original Message-----
From: Phil (VA3UX) []
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 7:13 PM
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] Copyrights, patents, costs,

I agree with you Dean but I don't recall anyone ragging on
Tek for the high
cost of their manuals. I've never spoken to anyone that
didn't consider
the Tek scope manuals to be the "benchmark" of what a manual
should be; a
standard to be worked towards by all others, a standard that
few others (if
any) achieved. The Tek manuals are masterpieces and they
should be
expensive. Now I'm referring here to the older stuff (50's
to 70's) since
that's pretty much all I have here. The work in putting
those manuals
together must have been incredible : the clarity of thought
and writing,
the photography, the details, the exploded diagrams as you
pointed out -
all first class. Now I do recall a recent post about
someone paying good
money for a current manual that sounded like it's content
disappointing, but that's the only negative I've ever heard
read. Clearly, Tek is a different company today than it was
30 or 50 years
ago. But so are most companies. My own employer is a
disappointing shell
of what it used to be just 15 years ago.

Anyhow I otherwise agree with everything you wrote.


At 04:19 PM 9/17/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>On behalf of Tektronix and every other manufacturer of
>industrial test equipment, I can understand why a manual
would cost
>so much. When you consider all of the drawings, parts
>mechanical parts "explosions", etc. complete with pull-out
>schematics, parts-placement diagrams, etc., all nicely
bound, heavily
>edited for minimal mistakes, high-quality paper, good
printing ....
>well, it's no wonder that a manual gets expensive. We can
rag on Tek
>all we want for high-cost manuals, but the day wasn't that
long ago
>that Tek charged either $7.50 or $15.00 for their manuals
>of the manual. Even back then, that was dirt-cheap!
>They always included two manuals with each instrument.
That's one
>reason that a lot of Tek manuals are so plentiful on the
>Tucker doesn't always copy those manuals. We tried
ordering an hp
>manual from them once and found out that the delay in
ordering and
>the high cost of the manual was because they were going to
order it
>directly from hp "for me" ... and add to the delay and the
>considerable. (I don't remember the circumstances of why
we were
>ordering through them vs. directly from hp.)
>Tek sued for copyright and patent infringement once. It
left a bad
>taste in their mouths, too, so that may be why they "speak
loudly and
>carry a small stick". The suit where they sued the U.S.
>Lavoie Labs, Hickok, et. al. for "cloning" 545 scopes for
>contract fulfilment took upwards of 10 years and gained
them nothing
>but principle. The money they spent defending their
property was far
>greater than that awarded -- from companies long-gone.
>One reason that Tek is poor with support of older
instruments is that
>Tektronix is Tektronix's greatest competitor. How could
they expect
>to sell TDS-series scopes for a small fortune when there
were all
>kinds of fully-functioning, lab-grade, analog Tek scopes
out there on
>ebay and in "Nuts & Volts" magazine for pennies on the
dollar? You
>reduce that competition by killing support.
>The comment was made something on the order that Tek's
lousy customer
>service support on the older equipment is doing little more
>losing customers for new equipment. Who are we fooling
here? The
>same folks that are buying 465's, 7904's and 7854's off
ebay are not
>going to be buying anything new from Tek. That's not even
>I'm not a Tek-blue supporter here. Just flipping over the
other side
>of the coin. I don't think that it makes sense that the
>Series" and other out-of-print publications should be
hoarded by Tek
>and not shared. If there's no profit for them in
>reprinting "Vertical Amplifiers" for sale, then there's no
loss if
>someone else does. At that point, it's only a matter of
>and is more like me when I was a kid not letting my sister
play with
>my microscope even though I hadn't touched it in six years
and had
>zero interest in it.
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

Join to automatically receive all group messages.