HH75,
I wonder if you've had a chance to use the LiteVNA with some of the nanoVNA apps (Saver, App, ...) and form a view on how compatible it is? Like you, I'd like some capability above the 1.5 GHz limit of my current nanoVNA-F. I use the PC acquisition/analysis/plotting packages for most bench work and have found it challenging to get stable and reliable hardware, firmware and software combinations. However, I currently have a stable system with the nanoVNA-F and the latest firmware from BH5HNU and Deepelec, plus the latest versions of the software packages.
I see from user groups that there have been noise issues with the LiteVNA64, principally when using the USB connection. The designer recently noted that the new hardware version, 0.3.1, addresses these issues. He notes that, with chip shortages, the new version is in short supply and, in particular, that all available 2.8" screen models still use the older design. I guess the takeaway message is that, for new purchasers who make use of the PC measurement capability, it'd be worth looking for the new hardware.
There are also various complaints about the plastic packaging and cheap SMA connectors but, as far as the latter goes, I'd probably re-package the VNA in the same way I did the metal-cased nanoVNA-F (see
https://groups.io/g/nanovna-users/message/28385). By the way, I have looked at the nanoVNA-F V2 with 3 GHz capability and, while it retains the nice packaging, it's apparently not a BH5HNU product and it's not obvious to me that there's an equivalent level of insight going into the firmware development and maintenance.
The nanoVNA world shows the best and worst of Open Source development, with enormous leaps in capability at low cost but a mire of confusion for serious users confronted with many hardware, firmware and software variants, a number of which are poorly tested and contain idiosyncratic bugs. Personally, I'd be happy to pay an order of magnitude higher price for good quality hardware backed by well-tested and curated firmware, and compatible with major apps. There have been a couple of valiant attempts (e.g. LibreVNA) but it's not clear that the firmware and software situation is any better than with the cheapies. It'd be interesting to hear from anyone with experience of these or similar units sitting between the nanoVNA family and VNA's like the Copper Mountain range.
73, Peter.