So when I get mine I will be sure to write something and post it for the world to use. I am at Python and C/C++ guy, what you think of using Qt for the application? and only doing connection over Ethernet to save the complexity of USB and drivers.
Sounds good. I'd say Ethernet is much more important than USB as it's much more flexible, and is even adequate for cases where one might have used USB instead (i.e. simple connection of one instrument to a PC, which can be done equally simple with a network cable).
What function do you think is needed in a software package for a arb gen?
First and foremost it should do the basic functions right, i.e. allowing the user to easily create waveforms without having to jump through hoops like having to calculate how many cycles are needed to get a certain frequency. A good Zoom functionality would be a bonus, and the template properties (i.e. sample size, max voltage) should be changeable without having to close the current file and create a new one with the right properties.
The Windows version (if you'd think of doing something for multiple platforms) should follow the Windows UX guidelines, i.e. how Windows behave and what standard key shortcuts like STRG-C do (the Rigol Ultra Station software is a very good example how a Windows program should *not* look like). It should also allow full screen mode (which the Rigol software doesn't do) to allow using more of the screen estate of a modern monitor for waveform editing.
Oh, and just to be sure: no Java!
Have a look at Tektronix ArbExpress which is their free utility for their own AWGs, which is the best one I've seen so far and very useable. If your program was a clone of ArbExpress then I'd gladly pay some money for it.
Ideally the program would also be flexible to be adapted to other AWGs, i.e. by storing the device-specific configuration in XML files so that other AWGs can be added in the future.
I am surprised that I have not found anything on software hacks for the Rigol DG1000 and DG1000Z.
I guess that the DG1000z doesn't sell that well. It's pretty expensive compared to the older DG1000 or the Siglent kit. And with a price close to the DG4000 most people are probably opting for higher bandwidth over the larger sample memory of the DG1000z.