Now you make it sound that a Siglent scope is just as good as an A-brand scope 3 times the price. It just isn't in real life. Read the latest addition to the SDS200X+ thread ( https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds2000x-plus-bugs-missing-features-feature-requests/msg3564889/#msg3564889 ) for another example of 'rough edges'.
Rough edges aren't the same as functional bugs.
And the decoding issue that post talks about isn't a bug, but is a configuration error on the user's part. It's something that bit me as well, until I understood what "include R/W bit" in the protocol decode config meant.
I cut down a cheap screen protector for laptop to fit the RTB2k screen. Rather difficult to apply without dust particles behind.
That kind of makes my point. For example R&S doesn't have this option. An I2C address is 7 bit or 10 bit (through a protocol extension I have not seen being used in the wild). Not 8 bit so why the option to display the I2C address as 8 bit? It doesn't make sense.
That kind of makes my point. For example R&S doesn't have this option. An I2C address is 7 bit or 10 bit (through a protocol extension I have not seen being used in the wild). Not 8 bit so why the option to display the I2C address as 8 bit? It doesn't make sense.
It doesn't make sense unless you want to see the entire address byte as the byte that went over the wire, rather than as 7 bits + 1 bit.
It's just a display option, nothing more. How is it any different from other display options that you might not have a use for, but that others might?
Someone thought it would be useful. They wouldn't have bothered to add it otherwise, because that takes engineering time, QA time (don't laugh ), etc.
That kind of makes my point. For example R&S doesn't have this option. An I2C address is 7 bit or 10 bit (through a protocol extension I have not seen being used in the wild). Not 8 bit so why the option to display the I2C address as 8 bit? It doesn't make sense.
It doesn't make sense unless you want to see the entire address byte as the byte that went over the wire, rather than as 7 bits + 1 bit.
It's just a display option, nothing more. How is it any different from other display options that you might not have a use for, but that others might?
Someone thought it would be useful. They wouldn't have bothered to add it otherwise, because that takes engineering time, QA time (don't laugh ), etc.
While I agree that I don't find 8Bit address (combined 7bit address and R/W bit) useful myself, fact is that Keysight 3000T (and all Infiniivision series) and Ikalogic logix software have a choice of 7/8 bit address.. So someone else thought it was necessary..
The procedure to set up a I2C bus decode and trigger is simple once you understand the basics. First you have to have the correct module or scope option. Second make sure your signal is on screen and taking up as much of the DAC as possible with good resolution, this will require having proper probes and knowledge about your signal. Turn on the bus, and start by setting the channel and threashold levels. Once this is done you will begin to see your signal decode. Adjust some of the small things such as Read/Write in the Address and how you want to have the bus displayed such as Hex or binary. For a complete demonstration or further details watch the following video or look through the User Manual for more details.
That kind of makes my point. For example R&S doesn't have this option. An I2C address is 7 bit or 10 bit (through a protocol extension I have not seen being used in the wild). Not 8 bit so why the option to display the I2C address as 8 bit? It doesn't make sense.
It doesn't make sense unless you want to see the entire address byte as the byte that went over the wire, rather than as 7 bits + 1 bit.
It's just a display option, nothing more. How is it any different from other display options that you might not have a use for, but that others might?
Someone thought it would be useful. They wouldn't have bothered to add it otherwise, because that takes engineering time, QA time (don't laugh ), etc.
While I agree that I don't find 8Bit address (combined 7bit address and R/W bit) useful myself, fact is that Keysight 3000T (and all Infiniivision series) and Ikalogic logix software have a choice of 7/8 bit address.. So someone else thought it was necessary..Well - purely hypothetically - what would you do if you got a contemporary A-brand DSO once in your life, wouldn't you think this has finally to be THE reference?
In a frantic attempt to bash a certain brand, especially if it's just for a feature you don't understand, it might turn out that this supposed reference has a few rough edges and is different from everything else - so much that it is the only one that has that deficit.
... I am rather underwhelmed with the search capabilities of the Siglent. It's a weakness that I think needs to be addressed. The Instek is better in that regard.
Remember how I was talking about how segments are an afterthought in the Instek? Well, it turns out that the search capability is a great example of how that's the case. It's not available at all with segments turned on.
You seem to fail to see that two people on this forum got confused by this. I wouldn't be surprised Keysight will also adjust the trigger condition (7 bit / 8 bit) accordingly instead of allowing to trigger on a 7 bit address and display an 8 bit number. Thats why I wrote 'rough edges' and not 'bug'. Stuff that can send a less experienced engineer on a wild goose chase.
While it's certainly true that there could be a lot more search conditions, the segment search is definitely there, at least on the touch screen instruments starting with the SDS2000X Plus.
That kind of makes my point. For example R&S doesn't have this option. An I2C address is 7 bit or 10 bit (through a protocol extension I have not seen being used in the wild). Not 8 bit so why the option to display the I2C address as 8 bit? It doesn't make sense.
It doesn't make sense unless you want to see the entire address byte as the byte that went over the wire, rather than as 7 bits + 1 bit.
It's just a display option, nothing more. How is it any different from other display options that you might not have a use for, but that others might?
Someone thought it would be useful. They wouldn't have bothered to add it otherwise, because that takes engineering time, QA time (don't laugh ), etc.
While I agree that I don't find 8Bit address (combined 7bit address and R/W bit) useful myself, fact is that Keysight 3000T (and all Infiniivision series) and Ikalogic logix software have a choice of 7/8 bit address.. So someone else thought it was necessary..Well - purely hypothetically - what would you do if you got a contemporary A-brand DSO once in your life, wouldn't you think this has finally to be THE reference?
In a frantic attempt to bash a certain brand, especially if it's just for a feature you don't understand, it might turn out that this supposed reference has a few rough edges and is different from everything else - so much that it is the only one that has that deficit.You seem to fail to see that two people on this forum already got confused by this. I wouldn't be surprised Keysight will also adjust the trigger condition (7 bit / 8 bit) accordingly instead of allowing to trigger on a 7 bit I2C address and display an 8 bit number. Probably the UI is also a lot more clear. Thats why I wrote 'rough edges' and not 'bug'. Stuff that can send a less experienced engineer on a wild goose chase.
And don't for a minute think the R&S is the only A-brand scope that went through my hands. If you'd paid attention you'd know it is just one scope in a very long list of scopes I own or have owned. So your frantic attempt to downplay my remark fails miserably.
I'm curious what the R&S RTB series does with this, since an excellent UI is one of its strong suits. If it has the option to incorporate the read/write bit in the address display, then it's likely they thought through how best to do i2c triggering with that setting in mind.
In your world there are only Boing, Lockheed Martin and looser hobby users, and nothing in between.
Education buyers who buy overpriced scopes for education are asses, because they buy 2 scopes instead of 20 with budged they have.
Same with companies. Not every company is military contractor, with unlimited budget (coming from taxpayers pocket and nobody can ask why, because you know ...).
And that is super rich USA. Now enter rest of the 6,5e9 people on the world.
Siglent and Rigol scopes are good value even at retail prices, with no hacks, especially when they run specials that give you thousands of USD worth of options for free.
And open source works backward of what you said. I know open something agenda tells you different but it isn't so.
It took Linux 20 years and 10s of thousands of patches and additions to basic OS kernel and API by likes of IBM, Novell, Microsoft (yes Microsoft) etc, to make it a good, usable, operating system it is today. Open sourcing it didn't do a thing. It was free (no money) that did it.
You cannot open source scope of any significance that easy. Hardware manufacturing margins are so low that all the profit comes from analysis software sitting on top of it. Why would a company do that for practically free so somebody else can make money on it. Or not, for free..
It's funny how you leap from "capitalism good" A companies "deserve" to charge huge amounts of money for their scopes, to "other" companies should give it for practically free..
Write a letter to Keysight and ask them why they don't release opens source scope... If feel a bit of double standards there..
Hive mind did answer it. We have one user that insists on specific thing, one that trolls every discussion on everything, many who think all is fine as it is, and many that don't care, because the simply use any device the way it says in a book, do the job and move on to another project. After Dave made video on it, where he mudded situation even more by talking about similar but slightly different issue, even then, nobody cared enough to make a poll. Nobody cares, it's just few loud ones that make this visible... LeCroy users like it well enough, and even on those scopes that have optional manual control, people use it in AUTO all the time...
So yeah, potential users need to know different scopes have some idiosyncrasies in a way they work, and that is it.
The latter category, however, is driven by the hobbyists and self-selectors; the people who might not be participating at all if it weren't for the huge value presented by the hacks (and the hacks, we have to admit, at this point are a marketing strategy and not a technical oversight...). The hacks were first on the cheapest entry item (the Rigol 1054z), then some Siglent scopes, then more expensive Siglent scopes; then back to the newer, cheaper Rigol scopes...
The "hacks" are not a marketing strategy on theirselves. Most of the time, what people here call "hacks", are no more no less than taking advantage of the licensing mechanism that the manufacturer developed for adding features after sale.
Once the mechanism becomes known, the manufacturer could try to change the mechanism and we've seen it done many times. That decision to change or not the licensing mechanism is the decision that could be called in the "marketing strategy". Although, changing a licensing mechanism can present HUGE costs and technical difficulties that are hard to deal (as backward/forward compatibilities, etc.)
Bear in mind that practically ALL scopes that have licenseable options can be (or is it "have been"... ) upgraded by others besides the vendor. The fact that only the more common and lower-priced (B and C) scopes have their methods in the public's eye doesn't mean that all A-brands haven't had their methods known under the counter in more private forums.
So, is that a "marketing strategy"? I call it a "feature" of the licenseable options world.
And then there's the issue of the entire ecosystem of things you could program a scope to do that aren't even thought of by existing vendors.
And then there's the issue of the entire ecosystem of things you could program a scope to do that aren't even thought of by existing vendors.Like what ?
And then there's the issue of the entire ecosystem of things you could program a scope to do that aren't even thought of by existing vendors.Like what ?
Like defining a stop condition that will stop the scope when it's been hit.
Like defining a stop condition that will stop the scope when it's been hit.Single ?
Hello,
I am still unsure as to what scope to purchase, after following all the replies, both the R&S RTB2004 and the Siglent SDS2104X+ both seem to be fantastic pieces of test equipment for the money.
Like defining a stop condition that will stop the scope when it's been hit.Single ?
Nope. That just gets you one capture. The actual stop condition might occur after multiple trigger events, and the idea here is that you'd want to capture all such events (or, at least, the last N events, where N is the number of segments you can capture based on your settings) up until the stop condition occurs.
And then there's the issue of the entire ecosystem of things you could program a scope to do that aren't even thought of by existing vendors.Like what ?
There's a lot of this functionality already in X Plus and SDS5000X DSO's if you were to follow the link in Reply #158.
Once Search parameters have been properly set you can define them to Trigger conditions and tune them further.
Oh no....OT another OS DSO thread !
Please take it elsewhere.
John, to make things (un)clearer for you: the RTB is as "doctorable" as the SDS.
Really?
I thought some had started and dumped the firmware, but no real progress had been made, as most RTB users got a full-spec bundle at one of the sales.
I've got the COM4 bundle too so it's "too late" for me, but could you link to the thread where they've cracked that nut?
Oh no....OT another OS DSO thread !
Please take it elsewhere.
Uh, it's a bit odd to be calling the answers to your own question "OT", don't you think?
(true as the characterization may be ... )