Talk:162: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
I'm asking the VintageTek Museum what they think. | I'm asking the VintageTek Museum what they think. | ||
[[User:Kurt|Kurt]] ([[User talk:Kurt|talk]]) 13:47, 3 April 2024 (PDT) | [[User:Kurt|Kurt]] ([[User talk:Kurt|talk]]) 13:47, 3 April 2024 (PDT) | ||
The Museum guys think it's a non-Tek clone, though they are amazed that somebody would bother to clone the 162. [[User:Kurt|Kurt]] ([[User talk:Kurt|talk]]) 06:41, 4 April 2024 (PDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 05:41, 4 April 2024
The two "early" photos might show a non-Tek clone of a 162, which is also interesting. If so, we can add them to Category:Clones_of_Tektronix_instruments. Kurt (talk) 04:47, 3 April 2024 (PDT)
Oh, interesting! I found the pictures on Ebay, claiming it is Tektronix. It looks quite different to the version I know from Tekwiki, but since its a quite early product I have no clue how these units looked early on. So I simply dont know if they are genuine or not, the (German) ebay seller seems to believe that they are TEK. Gregor (talk) 08:41, 3 April 2024 (PDT)
I'm asking the VintageTek Museum what they think. Kurt (talk) 13:47, 3 April 2024 (PDT)
The Museum guys think it's a non-Tek clone, though they are amazed that somebody would bother to clone the 162. Kurt (talk) 06:41, 4 April 2024 (PDT)