I am suggesting the amount of rotation to jump to the next selection be a bit larger...
No matter how large they make the amount of rotation it can always be just on the edge when you press the button, so I think it would make more sense to solve this in the software, like ignoring a turn when it happens less than 100ms before a push or something like that.
Since it has no way to see into the future (needs faster FPGAs for that ) to determine that a push is about to occur, that means it will delay all turn reactions for that same interval. Aka, "is this a real turn, or an accidental turn while clicking?"
The response from users will then be... "Why is this d@mn thing so laggy? The responsiveness to the knobs is poor."
No matter how large they make the amount of rotation it can always be just on the edge when you press the button, so I think it would make more sense to solve this in the software, like ignoring a turn when it happens less than 100ms before a push or something like that.
Since it has no way to see into the future (needs faster FPGAs for that ) to determine that a push is about to occur, that means it will delay all turn reactions for that same interval. Aka, "is this a real turn, or an accidental turn while clicking?"
The response from users will then be... "Why is this d@mn thing so laggy? The responsiveness to the knobs is poor."
Maybe I am missing something obvious. Is there some quick way to remove measurements from the bottom of the screen.
There are dedicated buttons for adding measurements but I cant find a quick way to clear them.
Maybe I am missing something obvious. Is there some quick way to remove measurements from the bottom of the screen.
There are dedicated buttons for adding measurements but I cant find a quick way to clear them.
Measure => clear all items
Did some testing with the new FW, and updated my Bandwidth chart.
.
.
Did some testing with the new FW, and updated my Bandwidth chart.
There is not much more bandwidth on a 2072 with option 300 Mhz, the entry
of the 2072 , the non A models, dont get 300 Mhz, mine goes to 280 Mhz.
The lack of a internal 50 ohm terminator...
Also got more noise, see picture with only 1 channel, and then enable channel 2,
the difference is clear, on 1 nS the sample rate is to low for two channels.
The performance is worse on 1 nS then on 2 nS.
I did the test with the DSGH key, see option picture.
So the advantage of the new bandwidth option is not big for the non A models.
You are better off with the 200 Mhz version. So use the DSEH key for better performance.
Is there any chance that that the additional noise/fuzz or whatever artifact is evident in the display with 'channel 2 also active' (New2.png) is due to the that sample rate dropping from 2GHz down to 1GHz? Probably not, but I just wanted to ask before giving up on the 300MHz BW for the DS2000 (for the non A anyway).
Also, I have been wondering for some time if going from 200MHz to 300MHz BW was detrimental, because it appeared to me that the increased Overshoot (with 300MHz BW) was likely due to the rising response around 115MHz of the 300MHz BW selection.
What condition is shown in picture 'New6' with the FFT?
Thank you for the very interesting and informative BW data you provided on the DS2000.
In conclusion, I understand that you believe now that 200MHz should be as high as we should go for the DS2000 'non A' version?
I edit my post, the FFT i added because of the improved function of it after the last FW
And yes i think 200 Mhz is the best performance for the non A model, 300 gives some unwanted behavior.
And the differences are to small, 230 versus 280 Mhz...
Storage->Traces.
How I can delete a Trace after loading? (Without turning off the scope)
Also got more noise, see picture with only 1 channel, and then enable channel 2,
the difference is clear, on 1 nS the sample rate is to low for two channels.
The performance is worse on 1 nS then on 2 nS.
I'm still using cyberbet's fimware at 300 Mhz but with 200 MHz bandwidth limit available. No CAN but I have no use for it right now. Still undecided if I should update to the newest firmware....
IMO the improvements in the latest FW are way more valuable than the ~50MHz of extra BW you may be getting with that old FW version.
IMO the improvements in the latest FW are way more valuable than the ~50MHz of extra BW you may be getting with that old FW version.Strongly agree.
I just want to add, it is not only the BW, and noise, a base time of 1ns is quite useful.
i dont agree, the 1 nSec, has only 4 samples ( one channel) or 2 samples ( 1 channel)
I just want to add, it is not only the BW, and noise, a base time of 1ns is quite useful.
IMO the improvements in the latest FW are way more valuable than the ~50MHz of extra BW you may be getting with that old FW version.Strongly agree.
I just want to add, it is not only the BW, and noise, a base time of 1ns is quite useful.
i dont agree, the 1 nSec, has only 2 samples ( one channel) or 1 samples ( two channel)
so be carefull what you measure... can be not so usefool
LOL... I found a bug?
LOL... I found a bug?
It can't really be classified as a bug: you're running an option that is not officially available for the DSO you're running it on. If a DS2302A does the same thing (or if Rigol EVER sells BW updates for other DS2000 models) then it could be called a bug.
How you call it then?