Dataloggers

In his posting concerning dataloggers, Gregor Trinkaus-Randall
<gregor.trinkaus-randall [at] state__ma__us> writes

>... Unlike a previous respondent, I
>have not been impressed with the Hobo's software.  I think that the
>Veriteq's is much more sophisticated and easy to read.  (Note: my
>recollection is that Dickson is using the Veriteq software as well.)
>Currently, I also think that Dickson has a datalogger that is
>essentially a Veriteq 2000 (my guess only) under the Dickson name.

Seeing as I'm the previous respondent in question, I'll take this
opportunity to qualify my remark:

I am very impressed with the sophistication and ease of use of the
Onset BoxCar Pro 4.0 software.  The BoxCar 3.6 software, which Onset
continues to market, is decidedly lacking.  I am a bit surprised
that Onset continues to market this other software package, as it
doesn't seem to do justice to their loggers, but that's their
business.  However, I would urge anyone who is considering to
purchase Onset loggers to steer clear of BoxCar 3.6 software.

>From what I can tell, the Dickson D200's are similar to the Veriteq
Spectrum 2000's.  However, much of the Dickson line does not appear
to be rooted in Veriteq technology (The TP series of loggers and the
TM series of loggers don't look to be rebranded Veriteq').  Demo
versions of Dickson and Veriteq software are available through their
respective web sites <URL:http://www.dicksonweb.com/>
<URL:http://www.veriteq.com/html/vrtq2500.htm#download>.  They
differ substantially, so it's worth checking out both of them if
you're considering purchasing Veriteq's vs. Dicksons.

Will Jeffers
Collections Care Specialist
Department of Scientific Research
Museum of Fine Arts
465 Huntington Avenue
Boston, MA 02115
USA
617-369-3466
Fax: 617-369-3702




                                  ***
                  Conservation DistList Instance 13:60
                   Distributed: Friday, May 26, 2000
                       Message Id: cdl-13-60-002
                                  ***