Feel bad about my Siglent purchase

[0culus]

The banhammer can't come soon enough for this wanker. 

[tautech]

This is not true when the manufacturer offers the bandwidth upgrade option themselves for all the scopes of a given series, including upgrading the lowest tier model to the highest bandwidth version.
I don't know about Siglent but Rigol definitely offers this capability.

I don't know about Siglent X-E models. But for Siglent X models they installed hardware capacitor to limit bandwidth. So there is no way to unlock higher bandwidth with no desoldering capacitor in the RF frontend.

The DSO in question is SDS2104X Plus and there certainly is a optional BW upgrade path for them.
100-200 MHz, 200-350 MHz and 350-500 MHz.

X-E models don't have an official BW upgrade path instead they need be hacked.....100-200 MHz or 200-350 MHz depending on the X-E series.
SDS2000X series also never offered a BW upgrade path.

[LootMaster]

OK then, I guess the Choice has been narrowed down.

I cant touch the sticker.

SDS2352 it will remain.

MSO5074...nope... I cant entertain encouraging the company that started the no screwdriver hackfest we see today.

I'd rather it be a 500$ increase and we all get treated the same.

No more BW versions !!!

[radiolistener]

I thought I understood otherwise, WTF?

Siglent X-E scope has official bandwidth unlock keys? I didn't follow Siglent topic since I have old X model.

But for X model there is need to remove capacitor to unlock bandwidth. If you unlock it in software, the hardware will be still limited.


For example, you can see such capacitor on the right side of AD8370 chip:

[tautech]

I thought I understood otherwise, WTF?

Siglent X-E scope has official bandwidth unlock keys?

No X-E don't, no official BW upgrade path.

I didn't follow Siglent topic since I have old X model.

But for X model there is need to remove capacitor to unlock bandwidth. If you unlock it in software, the hardware will be still limited.

Correct.

[LootMaster]

Aaaaa…

Anyways, I see myself using a 4 channel scope like this more than an MSO.

With 4 channels I wont really need the MSO, to debug logic.

But once I'm done with the convulsions that will follow this massive purchase, maybe I'll be up for an MSO, and 2x 350mhz probes.

Now if the triggers are as smart, maybe all logical debugging can be done with a 4 channel.

But anything with a motor or tesla  coils weird stuff I like to study is limited with 2 channels + MSO.

While 4 channels, I can overlap on a lot of logic troubleshooting... Yeah ok the memory depth will be eaten quick, but I got smart triggers.

Choices choices....

[tautech]

While 4 channels, I can overlap on a lot of logic troubleshooting... Yeah ok the memory depth will be eaten quick, but I got smart triggers.

Choices choices....

SDS2104X Plus.....best in class 200 Mpts mem depth.....actually 200*2, 200 Mpts for each ADC.
Proven ~185 MHz -3dB BW point.

[LootMaster]

Tautech Tautech…

Always has good arguments to make it clear.

But I wanna Emphasize an important aspect.

Nerd satisfaction: Big ass touch screen Ipad oscilloscope... Now come on.

[tautech]

Tautech Tautech…

Always has good arguments to make it clear.

But I wanna Emphasize an important aspect.

Nerd satisfaction: Big ass touch screen Ipad oscilloscope... Now come on.

Take your pick for user input.....controls, mouse or touch.....or use all 3 as many that have these do.

[uski]

MSO5074...nope... I cant entertain encouraging the company that started the no screwdriver hackfest we see today.

Rigol has been founded in 1998. Hacks were discussed decades before that, for instance with CB radios that could be unlocked to communicate to more channels, and that were designed to be capable of doing it, but locked for regulatory purposes.

The balance between hardware and software has shifted in the past few years, with a bigger part of the behavior of the products defined in software, so what was previously artificial limitations in hardware now have shifted to artificial limitations in software. But it is fundamentally the same thing, just an artificial limitation, and there is nothing new to this.

You really lack perspective.

PS: Going to make you angry but I have personally designed hardware which was limited in software for certain markets. And there were good reasons to that. It's not because you can't understand them or that you don't like this in your very own world that it is not a sound decision that can benefit everyone.

[LootMaster]

If you wanna know if both situations are equivalent in terms of ethics.

Use the following situation: A young engineer/repairman/maker/CEO buys the scope to use it in the production cycle of w/e things he needs to inspect.

He sees the price and determines his needs and shells out the 2999$.

Now 2 weeks later, he sees some other guy with the same thing, but he got it for 1400$. And absolutely no consequence will arise.

Now how does young engineer/repairman/maker/CEO feel? If he don't feel pissed off out of his mind, situation is different.

In your situation, I imagine myself feeling nothing.

You=wrong... You lack perspective.

I have no beef with hacking per say, I have beef with being the dumb fuck who gets caught in this game. And I sympathize with any man who  gets caught.

[ataradov]

I bought a scope today, and tomorrow the company came out with the new model and dropped the price on the old one. Should I feel bad?

Things change. Sometimes they change in a span of a week.

If you have any clue at all, you would figure out that there may be a hack, since as it has been pointed out, people hacked things since before we were born.

But based on your posts, I feel like arguing here is totally useless. You do you.

[LootMaster]

Those hacks required some higher knowledge... Here? What have they earned more than the guy who got caught? They saw the thread so they must know better?

If you don't need to open it, its pretty much on purpose... Lets leave it at that. I don't wanna argue.. I feel bad for the guy who agrees to play these games of no consequence.

I laught when I see people compare old things prior to internet vs the *hacking* that I see in the thread.

Come on people... Nobody wants to feel disgusted like I described above, its sickening.

[Bud]

Life is too short to kill yourself worrying about a few dollars. OP save yourself a heart attack, just move on with your life.

[ataradov]

People changed clock multiplier as early as 486 machines in the BIOS. No special knowledge.

Prior to the Internet hardware hacks were published in magazines, no need for special knowledge, just a magazine subscription or even library access.

I understand you are disappointed, but it it entirely your fault. You should have checked for all the possibilities before buying anything.

Also, I assure you no CEO cares about $2000 "lost" on non-hacked equipment. It is not a thing that happens.

The amounts of money you save by hacking and the risks you take only make it attractive to hobbyists.

[LootMaster]

Have not received anything yet. Its all up for grabs.

Those elements you cite Alex were probably fringe.

Tell me honestly now... If this 2 way phenomenon is fringe. Or more than 50% ?

[ataradov]

I don't understand what you mean by "fringe". The whole concept of having a scope is fringe to majority of people on the planet.

Among people that owned technology it was pretty common to find ways to improve it. Electronics is a niche hobby. And magazines had entire sections dedicated to this kind of stuff.

In many cases it was not unlocking what manufacturer has locked out, but simply improving what manufacturer missed.

Overclocking CPUs is a pretty common thing now, it was common back then. It was more common as computers were a specialty tool. Now that they became a disposable consumer item that anyone can get, overclocking rate dropped. But the same type of people (enthusiasts) that were overclocking back then, still overclock now.

[LootMaster]

People changed clock multiplier as early as 486 machines in the BIOS. No special knowledge.

Prior to the Internet hardware hacks were published in magazines, no need for special knowledge, just a magazine subscription or even library access.

I understand you are disappointed, but it it entirely your fault. You should have checked for all the possibilities before buying anything.

Also, I assure you no CEO cares about $2000 "lost" on non-hacked equipment. It is not a thing that happens.

The amounts of money you save by hacking and the risks you take only make it attractive to hobbyists.

What are those risks now that precedents were set?

Havent we reached the point where series are sold/should be sold based off their memory and measurement capabilities? Ease of use?

Why is BW still an issue? You either need it or you don't really. Now if you cant afford and jump higher for *code* for the big BW you can always go for lower memory and features???...hmmm???

[ataradov]

What are those risks now that precedents were set?

Depends on the company. Many will need traceable hardware/software for certification reasons. They will also need calibration certificates and updating the options automatically invalidates previous calibration. And the cost of that may be more than the cost of the upgrade.

Business and hobby uses are very different. For a business the primary expense is payroll in most cases. If the scope is "upgraded" and an engineer has to spend time second guessing if observed signals are real or the results of an upgrade, then the price of that upgrade will be quickly overshadowed by the engineer's salary.

As a hobbyist you are not paying yourself a salary for the time you mess with the equipment.

Havent we reached the point where series are sold/should be sold based off their memory and measurement capabilities? Ease of use?

That is up to marketing departments to decide what we have reached and what we have not. Your job is to pick from what is available on the market.

[LootMaster]

Ok Alex.

If its not billionaire bay then 2000$ is trash and I should be richer, and as a slave to the mighty oscilloscope conglomerate, its my duty to suck up the massive financial loss that will be result of buying that 2354 oscilloscope because my precious engineer will be confused less ...

Even tho, I feel the urge and need to purchase this for my own needs and thus tormented by choices... It would be my job, to pay more because I am ignorant.

Those who are not ignorant, bless them by a paper that defends you for the eventual lack of consequence and the millivolt accuracy.

My sincerest apology, you win this argument.

[Mechatrommer]

I bought a scope today, and tomorrow the company came out with the new model and dropped the price on the old one. Should I feel bad?
Things change. Sometimes they change in a span of a week.

bad analogy! here is better.... I bought a scope today, and tomorrow i realize there is a store selling the same thing and more powerful at half or less the price since many years ago. Should I feel bad? I'm stupid toxic or just blame the store that sells cheaper because its "unethical" suit yourself pick whatever you want to blame except yourself.

[mawyatt]

I believe Rigol, Siglent and others like them know about these "hacks" and in fact are subtly encouraging it

Advertising is expensive and by allowing a "hack" to a higher level of performance/features, but making it not too easy, they have cleverly created a opportunity for technical savvy folks, like the one's here, to openly discuss this capability and convey the means to so. This improves the awareness of technical folks that may not have heard of them, that may be employed in electronics, and may recommend them to the firms they are employed with.

Very clever business model IMO

In my case I've retired from the Chief Scientist/Engineer position, Adjunct Prof, Consultant, IC design, over 30 patents issued and a career that was over 50 years (been around advanced R&D electronics a long time). I had never heard of Siglent nor Rigol, have always made decisions to purchase TE that was HP, Agilent, Keysight, Tektronix and a few R&S instruments. So when I retired and wanted to still tinker around I got a couple Tek 2465 scopes and a couple 34401A DMMs off eBay, and fixed them up. Later I needed to cal the 34401As and decided to get a Keysight 34465A DMM since this would be a known reference source, then realized I needed a DSO and began following all the posts here. After some time and reading thousands of posts I decided on a DSO, which was hacked and enabled by the help of folks here. This lead to the purchase of an AWG, then a Spectrum Analyzer, all "hacked" with the help of folks here Do I feel guilty, hell no 

I paid for everything out of pocket, so no biased reviews, Siglent paid me nothing, and this detailed experience has made such an impression that I would highly recommend them to anyone without hesitation   If Siglent had hired me as a consultant, they would have paid way more than the cost of this equipment.

Just count the number of threads and posts (also other sites) that are related to "hacking" this equipment, then ask yourself what this level of exposure would have cost utilizing conventional advertising, then estimate the "lost revenue" that would have been created by not allowing "hacking". Now consider the direct recommendation benefits to higher level companies, which they likely could not penetrate because of lack of exposure, like myself that just purchased Keysight, Tektronix or R&S gear. Sure they aren't going to bump these tried and true sources for the higher end gear, but likely may get their "foot in the door" at a lower level general purpose usage platform with the help of some employee that has some home gear that was "hacked"

This is a clever business model, that is obviously working well for them 

Best,

[Simon]

i think it was an accidental model though that was discovered with the first Rigol scope that then became so popular that it set the scene for all that was to come in that market segment.

[Simon]

We also forget so easily that those first Rigol scopes ran 40MHz ADC's at 100MHz by design to cut costs.

[mawyatt]

That makes sense being an accidental discovery, as the "allow to be hacked" business model would have been hard to sell without some prior evidence.

Rigol over-clocked the ADC by 2.5X, that must have produced hideous results 

What ADC did they use?

Best,