Choosing an oscilloscope under $500

[tautech]

So, the Rigol DS1074Z-S  and the Siglent SDS1102X+ are both in my price range. But I wouldn't be getting a stand alone arb. The Rigol would save me about $150, and the Siglent would be about the same as the DS1054Z + DG1022. But the thing concerns me is the Jack of all trades aspect. Normally getting a dual featured product means both are half assed. Prime example is combination modem and routers... I feel like the extra 150 is worth spending to get a stand alone waveform generator than to buy it integrated in the oscilloscope. Opinions?

You are quite correct regarding the inbuilt AWG's, they aren't as powerful (features) as a standalone unit in this level of equipment. But is saying that they're at least as functional as old analogue FG's that offer a basic range of waveforms. Most still have some AWG programming ability but are mostly limited to one channel as inbuilts.
They're not as easy to use as a standalone with the UI blended into the controls available on a DSO.
Grab some manuals and have a look at how they're integrated (UI) into a DSO.

As an addition to a DSO in my experience they don't degrade DSO capabilities.
Hey, these inbuilts are getting better all the time and let's not forget the saved bench space they offer.
A careful study of specs for inbuilts and standalones should reveal the performance discrepancies.

[System Error Message]

considering the quality of software produced by EEEs no doubt getting seperate would be better. In terms of computing there are modem routers that are better than consumer modems and routers that are seperate such as dratek, zyxel, using SFP on an enterprise router.

[damn_dirty_ape]

I would stop and ask why you need an oscilloscope.  I bought a 20 MHz Hitachi oscilloscope for $40 off ebay.  It would be a LOT nicer to have some data recording abilities, higher frequencies, fft, etc, but $40 to see a waveform is too good.  My reccomendation is to get a CHEAP used analog o-scope, and then save for a really good logic analyzer or something that can do FFT.  Of course, this is just me, and you might have a different application. Just my 2 cents.

[System Error Message]

I would stop and ask why you need an oscilloscope.  I bought a 20 MHz Hitachi oscilloscope for $40 off ebay.  It would be a LOT nicer to have some data recording abilities, higher frequencies, fft, etc, but $40 to see a waveform is too good.  My reccomendation is to get a CHEAP used analog o-scope, and then save for a really good logic analyzer or something that can do FFT.  Of course, this is just me, and you might have a different application. Just my 2 cents.

He needs one because hes studying and learning EEE. Nothing like a good oscilloscope to help you with that. If you watch EEVblog's tutorial video on setting up a decent lab he suggested both digital and analog, they both have their disadvantages and advantages so having both is much better so having both makes up for what the other lacks.

[tautech]

I would stop and ask why you need an oscilloscope.  I bought a 20 MHz Hitachi oscilloscope for $40 off ebay.  It would be a LOT nicer to have some data recording abilities, higher frequencies, fft, etc, but $40 to see a waveform is too good.  My reccomendation is to get a CHEAP used analog o-scope, and then save for a really good logic analyzer or something that can do FFT.  Of course, this is just me, and you might have a different application. Just my 2 cents.

He needs one because hes studying and learning EEE. Nothing like a good oscilloscope to help you with that. If you watch EEVblog's tutorial video on setting up a decent lab he suggested both digital and analog, they both have their disadvantages and advantages so having both is much better so having both makes up for what the other lacks.

Problem is most tinkering and even formal learning these days is with low voltages so the skills and raw/basic knowledge required to keep an old CRO operative is uncommon in those with limited electronics experience.
While that shouldn't frighten you away from owning a CRO just be aware that any investment in one without the skills to fix it could be a waste of money.
IMO the only advantage of starting with a CRO is learning basic scope use as few if any of the now cheap CRO's have an Autoset button and to extract accurate measurements and waveforms from them you need to know how to "drive" one. These basic skills however set you up well for modern DSO use and the multitude of additional features they have.
Fixing CRO's was my hobby at one time and while those of us members can help online we rely on the skills of the member with the busted scope and the range of tools they have in order to fix it. I was never without 2 running CRO's just in case the other broke down so IMHO the beginner should start with a new DSO for reliability.

[Akya2120]

Yes, I watched the lab setup video. I've decided I'm going to get the rigol DS1054Z and the siglent SDG1025. I considered getting the DS1074Z-S plus, but the mso feature isn't that much of an upgrade and I can get another logic analyzer later. Having a seperate function generator will be more useful, and there will be less fiddling. From what I've read, it seems better than the Rigol DG1022. If the Siglent SDS1102X was a four channel I would probably go with that. The UI is a little better, and the scope is generally more responsive, but the four channels are worth having. I have been keeping an eye out for an analogue scope, and will certainly pick one up when I find a deal. I have used CROs before, and I try to stay away from the auto setup button as is. Thanks for the input everyone! I'll be making my purchase tomorrow.