Those scopes are pretty popular where I work, and the reliability record is terrible! In the last few months, 5 Agilent scopes broke down out of the few dozen in the lab! For that reason, during critical work, they keep a spare on a cart, ready to be quickly swapped in at any time.
not when you are dealing with 13GHz of scope ...
If I had access to a PFANG and a 13 GHz scope I would seize the opportunity to do some practical tests on the behaviour of various PCB track configurations. There are no end of simulations etc for varying widths of tracks, with or without a ground plane etc. but it would be great to see some real life measurements. What can you get away with, what is critical and what doesn't make much difference. What effect does a small impedance mismatch have.
not when you are dealing with 13GHz of scope ...
The high end Tektronix scopes are a lot more reliable. But the Agilents are used a lot because they have the automatic testing software needed for a lot of the modern high speed interfaces.
not when you are dealing with 13GHz of scope ...
The high end Tektronix scopes are a lot more reliable. But the Agilents are used a lot because they have the automatic testing software needed for a lot of the modern high speed interfaces.
DPO70000 ? disadvantages about that agilent scope is in-reliability but it can be upgraded to 1Gpts anyway ... But the 400,000 wfrms min rate for the 90000a is interesting, much more than what the DPO70000 can do, 300,000 wfrms min rate
while the tek scope is about 25k more expensive .. for the 12.5GHz model but also it's 10GS more
Do you know why the agilent is unreliable?
It's not a PFANG, it's a PFAG - just read what Agilent wrote on the front of the unit.