Fnirsi DS0-TC4...don't but it

[Anthocyanina]

For a lot of FNIRSI stuff Josh, I have to agree.  However, for this one, It's really not all that horrible.  It's biggest problem is that it's one of these "do everything" tools that does not do anything really well.  It's not one of the best FNIRSI things, but it's also far from the worst.

That said, the young guy I gave it too is getting good use out of it as he has nothing better.  That, I think, is a major factor in how some of us look at these ultra cheap toys.

they may have stuff that doesn't completely suck, but buying anything from them is continuing to finance their scammy practices of lying about the specs of their more expensive items. I've been tempted to buy their usb power meter, and one of these things, but i just can't support their scammy business

[KungFuJosh]

You can compare anything to anything else, but some comparisons are just a little flawed.
What’s the point of comparing a Ferrari to a Fiat Panda 4x4?
The outcome is clear from the start (which doesn’t mean the Panda isn’t the better car for you  ).

Comparing the SG-003A to the Fluke is, well...

I disagree. The question is what are you comparing?

Did the Ferrari and Fiat Panda both get to the destination? That's a valid comparison.

We're not going to compare them on style or speed. If both vehicles/devices can't get to the same destination, then there is a problem that price has nothing to do with.

[Martin72]

When you compare one toy to another, everything is fine in the world of toys.

[Aldo22]

We're not going to compare them on style or speed. If both vehicles/devices can't get to the same destination, then there is a problem that price has nothing to do with.

Exactly. 
I don't understand why you guys always have to use these derogatory terms (“toy,” “trash,” “crap,” “junk,” “garbage”...).
That's not very professional.

Why not set a reasonable goal and test the device against it?
Is an SG-003A good enough to calibrate a 3 1/2-digit DMM?
I think so. Mine certainly is.
That alone might be enough to justify the price.

[KungFuJosh]

That's not very professional.

Neither are the toys. 

Sorry, couldn't resist.

I have some of those toys, and I know what they are and are not capable of. Sometimes, for basic hobbyist use, they're better than toys. Sometimes, they're absolutely worthless and/or dangerous and should be thrown out.

If the devices are good enough for your needs, you should be happy with that.

[BillyO]

I don't agree with the sentiment of not comparing the devices. If they're both set to a specific value, they should match fairly closely. The better device is useful for a sanity check of the trash device. The better device might have better stability, or higher resolution, or whatever. That doesn't invalidate a comparison.

Maybe you mean use the better one to check the lesser one, right?

In case you don't, I'll have call you on this Josh.  By definition (and I'm assuming we all agree words have meanings) comparison means an evaluation of how two or more things are similar and how they are different.  No one in their right mind would take seriously the "evaluation" between a $50 device and one that cost 30 times more.  It's a foregone conclusion that the $1500 device had better be hugely superior and any attempt to evaluate which might be better would clearly be a true waste of time and energy.

I can see using the $1500 device to check the the $50 devices against it's specifications, but certainly not to determine which would be the better device.  Where is the validity in that?

Check a $50 device with a $1500 device.
Compare a $50 device to another $50 (or so) device.

[BillyO]

When you compare one toy to another, everything is fine in the world of toys.

Not necessarily.  Once toy might be vastly superior to the other.

The thing is, not everyone can afford $5000 for a DMM.  Some people can only afford $50 for a DMM.  In my mind, a $50 DMM is better than no DMM, especially if it meets it's specifications.

There is way too much Test Equipment elitism on this site.  I think it really turns off some people.

[Salient666]

I was just pointing out that my particular unit was not in spec. And I had bad luck with more than one device from this brand. That’s why I avoid it from now on. Doesn’t mean all is bad. But when I have multiple leaking Duracells, I will from then on buy another brand. The same with brand preference of ssds, microsd cards etc.

That said, I have fnirsi battery resistance tester now to play with and it seems it does a decent job so I might actually keep it.

[BillyO]

I have no issue with your position on this.  If I had your experience, I think I would feel the same way.

I also have had some issues with a few FNIRSI products, but I was lucky that for me the ratio was different.  I've had a lot more good (meets specs. and compares to peers, or is just plain good on it's own merits) than bad.

FNIRSI have a strange business model.  They don't design and build all (or possibly any) of the products they sell.  They are all contracted out, along with the support for them.  Because of this the results can vary dramatically.  Unless they apply some leverage to these contractors and stop doing business with them if contractors don't make good on their works and provide fixes so that the products meet their specifications and reasonable, industry standard expectations on useability and quality given their price class, they are likely to alienate more customers like yourself and eventually fail.

The market will decide.

[KungFuJosh]

I don't agree with the sentiment of not comparing the devices. If they're both set to a specific value, they should match fairly closely. The better device is useful for a sanity check of the trash device. The better device might have better stability, or higher resolution, or whatever. That doesn't invalidate a comparison.

Maybe you mean use the better one to check the lesser one, right?

In case you don't, I'll have call you on this Josh.  By definition (and I'm assuming we all agree words have meanings) comparison means an evaluation of how two or more things are similar and how they are different.  No one in their right mind would take seriously the "evaluation" between a $50 device and one that cost 30 times more.  It's a foregone conclusion that the $1500 device had better be hugely superior and any attempt to evaluate which might be better would clearly be a true waste of time and energy.

I can see using the $1500 device to check the the $50 devices against it's specifications, but certainly not to determine which would be the better device.  Where is the validity in that?

Check a $50 device with a $1500 device.
Compare a $50 device to another $50 (or so) device.

I think you should read what I wrote again.

[BillyO]

I think you should read what I wrote again.

I did.  I still think use of the word "comparing" is wrong for the purposes.  Maybe it's just me.

[KungFuJosh]

I think you should read what I wrote again.

I did.  I still think use of the word "comparing" is wrong for the purposes.  Maybe it's just me.

Measure a voltage with two devices and compare the result. How does that not make sense?

[BillyO]

Measure a voltage with two devices and compare the result. How does that not make sense?

Let me answer that with a little demonstration.

In the first picture, what do we get out of the comparison?  That the Keithley is a better meter?  Is that a valid result or could we have known that would be the result before we even started?  For me, and for that reason, it is not a valid comparison.  I would never say that the SZ308 is crap because it's not as good as the Keithley (there are plenty of other reasons why it's crap).  That is a ridiculous conclusion because it was never meant to compete with the Keithley, a meter that when it was new was more than 1000 times more costly than the $4 SZ308.  However, I can say that, as a check of the accuracy of the SZ308, the exercise is useful and shows the SZ308 meets it's specifications very nicely.

In the 2nd picture, we now have comparable $4 meters.  We can actually draw a useful conclusion from this.  That being the DM850 is slightly less accurate than the SZ308.  If I had only $4 to spend and accuracy was my main concern I'd use the result to choose the SZ308.  Beyond that, there are other direct and fair comparisons I can make between these two meters that I cannot reasonably make between the previous two.  For instance, if a hold feature was important to you and you are okay with a 0.1% accuracy error, then the DM850 is your better choice.

Maybe we are looking at this differently, but I do not consider comparing the Keithley to the SZ830 for any other reason other than to test the accuracy of the lesser meter as a reasonable thing to do.

[KungFuJosh]

Maybe we are looking at this differently, but I do not consider comparing the Keithley to the SZ830 for any other reason other than to test the accuracy of the lesser meter as a reasonable thing to do.

Isn't that literally the point of what I said?

Do you think calibration labs are running a scam by comparing less expensive meters to more expensive meters?

[BillyO]

Do you think calibration labs are running a scam by comparing less expensive meters to more expensive meters?

No, of course not, but they don't send you a little note saying your meter is crap because it's not as good as theirs either.

The point I'm trying to get across is that, around here, test equipment is often judged by comparison to equipment that costs 10, 100 or 1000 times as much, and as a result is denigrated.  Saying "That $50 gizmo is crap because it's not as good as my $5000 gizmo" is not valid, because of course it's not.  They are not the same class of gizmo.  Saying "That $50 gizmo is crap because it is nowhere near as good as this $50 gizmo" is valid, because they are the same class of gizmo.

[Salient666]

.... Saying "That $50 gizmo is crap because it's not as good as my $5000 gizmo" is not valid, because of course it's not......

But If my 1500 dollar gizmo tells me my 50 dollar gizmo is out of spec, and even if it costs one dollar, I wouldn't want it because also with cheap devices you should be able to trust your readings to a certain degree at least.

[BillyO]

Like I said, that's valid.  No issue there.

[KungFuJosh]

Don't worry. The reasons Fnirsi is generally crap goes well beyond a single spec.

[Aldo22]

Don't worry. The reasons Fnirsi is generally crap goes well beyond a single spec.

No, that's not true.
There are some Fnirsi devices that are disappointing because they don't live up to their specifications.
But there are also excellent products from Fnirsi.
And I stand by my statement: “crap,” etc., is not a category. It's a meaningless, derogatory term with no substance.

[KungFuJosh]

Don't worry. The reasons Fnirsi is generally crap goes well beyond a single spec.

No, that's not true.
There are some Fnirsi devices that are disappointing because they don't live up to their specifications.
But there are also excellent products from Fnirsi.
And I stand by my statement: “crap,” etc., is not a category. It's a meaningless, derogatory term with no substance.

You're welcome to your opinion, as am I.

In my opinion, Fnirsi is mostly useless crap that should be avoided. I've owned enough of their products to form an educated opinion based on my experience with them. Most of their stuff is overpriced. Most of their stuff is mostly useless. Most of their datasheets involve lies.

I do agree that a few items have limited usefulness, including the SG-004A, but I don't think it's worth the price.

Other items are simply dangerous, like their stud finder I've mentioned in the past (it detected a stud center, except it was electrical cables, not a stud).

Your opinion is different, and that's okay. You do you.

[Doctorandus_P]

I have seen a bunch of positive reviews of fnisrsi stuff. Those are often by paid for reviewers, or by people starting with electronics and who do not have the experience or expertise yet recognize how the fnirsi stuf is misleading them. When an oscilloscope is able to show a sine wave (at some frequencies) is not enough to give it a positive review.

I have seen also seen quite a lot of reviews of fnirsi stuff not meeting the specifications in their datasheets, and they are also fuzzing the software to obscure the fact that their equipment does not work properly.

I never bought any fnirsi stuff myself, and I won't either. The whole brand is a scam.

[BillyO]

In my opinion, Fnirsi is mostly useless crap that should be avoided.

Josh, you know I respect your contribution to this site and I'll add that I also respect your knowledge too.  However, given FNIRSI's (it's an acronym) business model, I think this is unfair.  I do use FNIRSI stuff almost every single day, and what I use is really very good.  Sure, like you I have bought some stuff form them that is not nearly up to snuff, but I have also bought some stuff that really is good.  I may be some sort of freak, but I have actually bought and tried more than 50% of what they sell and can honestly say that more the 50% of that is actually pretty good.

I think one needs to be careful in your decision whether to buy from them or not, but is that any different from how you need to treat any other "bargain basement" vendor?

I don't really know what to suggest, but I can certainly say they do market enough "junk" that someone buying just a few of their products could certainly come to the conclusion you have.  However, form my foolish endeavors, "most" of their stuff is not useless, but 30% of it may well fit into that category and maybe another 20% falls into the "why bother" category where they are not junk, but are not compelling in any way (like the DSO-TC4 .. and others .. ).

Their business model is strange and, honestly, I don't know how they will make it work.

[BillyO]

I never bought any fnirsi stuff myself, and I won't either. The whole brand is a scam.

Well, as someone that has bought a lot of FNIRSI stuff (just for the fun of it) I'll give your tacit assessment all the consideration it deserves. 

[KungFuJosh]

I don't really know what to suggest, but I can certainly say they do market enough "junk" that someone buying just a few of their products could certainly come to the conclusion you have.  However, form my foolish endeavors, "most" of their stuff is not useless, but 30% of it may well fit into that category and maybe another 20% falls into the "why bother" category where they are not junk, but are not compelling in any way (like the DSO-TC4 .. and others .. ).

Their business model is strange and, honestly, I don't know how they will make it work.

So what, we're arguing 30% crap vs. 51% crap? Or is it 30% crap + 20% useless is less than 51%?

Fine, I'll concede on that point. Only half of their stuff is crap. 

Thanks,
Josh

PS. I don't take anything about Fnirsi too seriously, and absolutely not personally. I do think it's mostly half junk, but to each their own. We're allowed to like cheap crap sometimes.

[Aldo22]

Maybe it’s pointless to try to categorize the entire brand.

As BillyO said:

They don't design and build all (or possibly any) of the products they sell.  They are all contracted out, along with the support for them.  Because of this the results can vary dramatically. 
...
The market will decide.

Every brand has a product or an entire product line that’s best to steer clear of. That goes for car manufacturers, too.

It doesn’t change the fact that, for example, BillyO or I use Fnirsi products often and enjoy doing so.
As I said, the DPS-150, SG-003A, and HS-01 are appealing products at affordable prices for hobbyists.

These days, you can find information online about every single product.
Personally, I wouldn’t want to buy an oscilloscope from Fnirsi, for example—at least not one that costs more than 50 euros.
But that doesn’t mean I have to condemn every single product from that brand.

The tendency to generalize doesn’t help here.
I don’t want to know if a brand is "good"; I want to know if a product offers good value for the money—and Fnirsi has a few of those.