As a longtime lab denizen I find this belief that
you can get good quality measurements through a
layer of remote switching gear and there-and-back
cable runs, something between humorous and
puzzling. If your equipment management fantasy
requires me to put all this "stuff" into my
carefully crafted bench or rack setups, I'll say
"no thanks", eat the budgetary cost and lock the
Maybe it works for you if everything is "digital"
and "slow". But if your product can be tested
with a bunch of long cables, switches and random
reallocations / e-teardowns in the mix, you're
not working on very challenging stuff.
It all seems like another matrix-management pipe
dream to me. Works great if you've got a sea of
uniform and adequate resources. Now tell me the
story about how the one guy who can do it, works
when you randomly redeploy the one critical piece
of gear that makes his rack work.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.