From Rigol I have both MSO1074Z-S and DS1074Z-S oscilloscopes, a DP832 power supply and a DSA815-TG spec an.
There is no doubt that had it not been for the potential post-purchase optimisation at least three of those four purchases would never have been made.
I do also have a reasonable selection of other oscilloscopes up to 20GHz sampling scopes, but my favourite go to scope is a 15yo HP 54642D 2+16Ch 500MHz 2GSa/s due to its almost instant on and awesomely easy to use UI. The MSO1074Z-S is my field scope and the DS1074Z-S is lent out.
On the PSU, I have a couple of other simple cheap single channel units that I've had for some years that I still use at least as much as the DP832. The DP832 is good for slightly more esoteric features like OCP and paired supplies, as well as having single digit mA and mV plus W readout.
The Rigol spec an does get used quite a lot more than the other two spec ans I have as it has the best feature set, although the worst frequency range, I have an old HP YIG boat anchor that goes up to 22GHz.
Regarding the OP's Tek TBS1052B, I still have my TDS2024B 4ch 200MHz 2GSa/s scope that has done me well for many years, but there's no doubt the Rigol beats the pants off it in every way except bandwidth and channel specific controls. The Tek's been in its bag almost permanently for a year or so, but it has a good deal of sentimental value to me, it's paid for itself many many times over during the past decade or so I've had it, several very successful products were developed with it.
I bought the Tek because, well, it was Tektronix, and a decade ago while it might not have been the best value for money the far eastern alternatives had little track record or reliable reviews. It was about US$2,500 too... ouch, I remember that hurting.
Rigol gets its fair share of criticism in the bug department, much of it warranted, but bang for buck, even with those oft reported bugs, it really can't be beat. If you think Rigol is bad you just need to look at some of the other brands from the same neck of the woods. Also keep in mind that Rigol is extremely popular, and with that popularity it means the chances of finding a bug and publicising it is far greater. Some of the apparently show stopper bugs have taken months if not years to come to light and be generally acknowledged. While by no means perfect, some of them are extreme or rare use cases: after all, they have taken a long time to come to light, so they can't be that frequently observed. Again, I am not excusing it, I'm just putting it into perspective.