- Boot-up time was reduced.
I am curious about how much hardware it shares with the 2-channel 1000X scopes... no teardown yet?
Internal shots.
A quick side-by-side comparison with the 1102 :
Bus and Ref buttons have moved to the Analyse menu
Has LAN interface, but remote front panel not yet implemented. PHY is SMC 8710A, so 100Mbit
Ridiculously long boot time - 55 secs v.21 on the 1102 - maybe still some debug code in there ? FW is V2.00
No WinCE license sticker on the back
Low-level noise performance identical.
Ref and FFT have dedicated size and position knobs, presumably to match the knob layout of the 1102. Not sire I like that these are on the left.
Still has external trig input on the back, but can no longer display it, which is as expected
The BLT board has gone to rev 3 but looks pretty much identical at first glance, apart from J104 now being fitted.
Might be interesting to swap into the 1102G...
I am curious about how much hardware it shares with the 2-channel 1000X scopes... no teardown yet?
Please excuse my ignorance, but what does the acronym BLT mean for that board?
Firmware for the DSOX1204x series is now posted on the Keysight website. As this scope runs linux it should be interesting to take a peak at.
Upon a quick check it looks like no, but I could be missing it somewhere..
Firmware for the DSOX1204x series is now posted on the Keysight website. As this scope runs linux it should be interesting to take a peak at.
Shouldn't be mission impossible to devise workarounds...
The .ksx is a initrnamfs file which can be easily opened with 7zip decompressor.
I own the EDUX1002G, then purchased MSO5074 from Rigol... for me, it is not near the usability of the Keysight... it can be hacked to have tons of features, but it is slow and the serial protocol decoding a toy. I am about to return it
The EDUX1002G hacked and with some hardware mods can have 2.5 channels and it is a pleasure and fun to use. The Rigol is giving me headaches, you don't know what you are getting from the scope, you are always wondering if what is showing is accurate or not.
I think Spear600 is old compared to new CPUs running faster and with more cores and Probably the old Windows CE was a better fit. That is why I asked about the responsiveness as it seems Linux is heavier and the same reason for it to take 1 min to boot might impact on the performance of the scope app
I think Spear600 is old compared to new CPUs running faster and with more cores and Probably the old Windows CE was a better fit. That is why I asked about the responsiveness as it seems Linux is heavier and the same reason for it to take 1 min to boot might impact on the performance of the scope appLinux doesn't have to be heavier. That is nonsense. Also the boot time of a Linux system is defined by the speed of the flash being used. Put a Sata SSD in an embedded Linux system and it wil start in seconds. Besides that the oscilloscope likely does a quick self test during starting.
I think Spear600 is old compared to new CPUs running faster and with more cores and Probably the old Windows CE was a better fit. That is why I asked about the responsiveness as it seems Linux is heavier and the same reason for it to take 1 min to boot might impact on the performance of the scope appLinux doesn't have to be heavier. That is nonsense. Also the boot time of a Linux system is defined by the speed of the flash being used. Put a Sata SSD in an embedded Linux system and it wil start in seconds. Besides that the oscilloscope likely does a quick self test during starting.What I meant is that PROBABLY the specific Linux distro in use is heavier than Windows CE on the SPEAR600 that the Keysight scope uses.
I know it can be made to boot in 10 seconds like the R&S or the Micsig TO1000 scopes, probably by using some battery backed memory to keep persistent code and data in memory saved for the next boot. I wonder if R&S scope takes longer to boot after a firmware update or the update process per se stores certain code & data in persistent memory.
But if they decided to go with the 60 seconds boot time, then there must be hardware limitations on the current SPEAR600 + flash + ASIC interface to implement specific techniques like smartphones or tablets.
The R&S are always fast. They don't use linux either.
R&S uses freeRTOS or something similar (it's listed in the open source acknowledgement thing). The boot time is always fast, and i don't think it saves anything between boots to do it. Definitely nice to have it that quick but I think Linux is also a reasonable choice if optimised well - boot times aren't everything.
I own the EDUX1002G, then purchased MSO5074 from Rigol... for me, it is not near the usability of the Keysight... it can be hacked to have tons of features, but it is slow and the serial protocol decoding a toy. I am about to return it
The EDUX1002G hacked and with some hardware mods can have 2.5 channels and it is a pleasure and fun to use. The Rigol is giving me headaches, you don't know what you are getting from the scope, you are always wondering if what is showing is accurate or not.
I own the EDUX1002G, then purchased MSO5074 from Rigol... for me, it is not near the usability of the Keysight... it can be hacked to have tons of features, but it is slow and the serial protocol decoding a toy. I am about to return it
The EDUX1002G hacked and with some hardware mods can have 2.5 channels and it is a pleasure and fun to use. The Rigol is giving me headaches, you don't know what you are getting from the scope, you are always wondering if what is showing is accurate or not.
Do you have specific example ?
It is not so easy to have scope on loan without losing money and I am open minded so if it is possible to have examples. I am interested.
I am also interested in what you criticize for the serial decoding on the Rigol ?
Before receiving a shitstorm on my head, I specify that I am really interested to know in what the Keysight is superior on these aspects.
I am not here to support Rigol, just to have examples from real life.
Thank you
I own the EDUX1002G, then purchased MSO5074 from Rigol... for me, it is not near the usability of the Keysight... it can be hacked to have tons of features, but it is slow and the serial protocol decoding a toy. I am about to return it
The EDUX1002G hacked and with some hardware mods can have 2.5 channels and it is a pleasure and fun to use. The Rigol is giving me headaches, you don't know what you are getting from the scope, you are always wondering if what is showing is accurate or not.
Do you have specific example ?
It is not so easy to have scope on loan without losing money and I am open minded so if it is possible to have examples. I am interested.
I am also interested in what you criticize for the serial decoding on the Rigol ?
Before receiving a shitstorm on my head, I specify that I am really interested to know in what the Keysight is superior on these aspects.
I am not here to support Rigol, just to have examples from real life.
Thank you
TK managed to achieve some 50000 triggers per second on Keysight 1000 triggering on 50 MHz SPI signal.
At first try Rigol MSO5000 couldn't go faster than some 3000. But after some discussion, and by setting the scope to Auto memory management (that is what Keysight does anyways) he managed to get it to capture 50000 triggers too..
His opinion of accuracy I have no idea where it comes from. It can only be more accurate on many measurements by virtue of 100x more memory and full memory measurements.
Problem is that 50000 SPI triggers on KS 1000 is USELESS, mostly. It can record maximum 50 segments, so you can capture first 50 of 50000 segments and the rest is lost. OTOH, MSO5000/7000/8000 and Siglent can actually capture all 50000 captures and save each for
later analysis. And I don't know about you but I can't read 50000 decodes per second by reading it from the screen in real time anyways. Getting slow with age, sorry..
Not to mention literally 10 times more analysis options on Rigol and Siglent. And that you can capture first and decode later without need to recapture because you forgot to enable decode or a setting was wrong.
There are many people that are seduced by idea that KS 1000 series is somehow smaller and cheaper, but basically almost equally powerful as 3000 series. They are nothing alike. KS 1000 is deliberately severely limited not to step on 2000 series which is also very limited subset of 3000A series. Cheapest scope that is very nice from Keysight is 3000A series, and a 3000T is a step up, being basically 4000 with smaller touch screen and only one ch of siggen. 3000/3000T have less memory and smaller screen than contemporary competition, but they are capable machines that hold their ground still. Not good choice for deep memory types of tasks, but probably best G.P. scope currently. My opinion.
1000 and 2000 are just pathetic, because 500 USD Siglents are so much more powerful. Compared with MSO5000 and Siglent SDS2000X+ they are just sad... That being said, that is if you use scope as a digital scope should be used, by using built in measurements, analysys, decodes etc..
If you use scope in a same manner you would use analog scope, counting divisions on screen and occasional use of cursors and such, and want scope to to be optimized for button twiddling speed, than those 1000 and 2000 series Keysights are going to be just fine. That is literally their target market: big brand, deliberately low on features (marketed as: easy to use), and made NOT to feel like digital scope as possible (again marketed to analog scope replacement crowd). If you want that (nothing wrong with it) and if you are willing to pay for it, perfect choice.
It is equivalent of Ferrari branded Fiat 500 sized car with all the visual Ferrari stuff, special exhaust that makes it sound angry. And whole 60 HP.
So in a parking lot full of Fiats, you will be noticed. Fact that it is in fact slower than Fiat 500 Abarth, makes no difference. Because you're not going to race it. You will use to go to grocery store in style every day, really. And that is fine, really. Nothing wrong with it.
Until you get delusional that since your car says Ferrari on the back, that means it is faster, better or in any way better value that Honda Civic type R or Golf GTI or whatnot, that costs the same.
It's not. That doesn't mean that for your (limited?) use case you will not enjoy every minute of driving it and be very happy with your purchase.
Because it is PERFECT for your priorities as a buyer.
You are missing one very important point, the idea is not to capture all 50000 packets with a scope to do an analysis. A logic analyzer is better suited for such capture and analysis. The point I was trying to make is that by triggering 50000 times, it can capture a specific event and the Siglent will probably miss it. That is the whole point of using the protocol analyzer on the scopes. My SPI test setup has a user button enabled that sends a specific packet 0x3F when pressed, and 0x37 when not pressed. The KS gets it almost on every click, but the siglent misses a lot of them, the SDS1104X-E that I tested missed like 80-90% of them. Even the GDS-1054B can trigger on 90-100% of the time, the siglent is very slow handling serial decoding and triggering.
Thank you for checking.
If stats were there, they would be somewhere buried in the measurement menu tree. I checked the user's guides of the 1000X, 2000X and 3000X and it is only referenced in the 3000X, and it is actually there on the scope. Funny it would be in the datasheets but not in the manuals or the machines.