| Products > Test Equipment |
| Oscilloscope Zoom Out Quirk |
| << < (76/113) > >> |
| 2N3055:
Since many people that doesn't have (or actively use) scope that has Lecroy/Picoscope/Siglent type of memory management are absolutely sure it is evil and unusable, based on prejudice, wild accusations and no real data, here is an example why all this is a BOGUS problem. Used Pico as example: A look at 50 ns pulse width (yes that is a zoom factor of 1M (1 milion), without any visible performance impact : same thing with resizable, floating overview: This is full size capture, with 200ms worth of data.... What is crippled here, or hard to use or hard to understand ? How is this HARDER to understand than manually fuffing around with sample lengths, timebases and such? What is unclear here? And to answer to Dave's predicament, you never get ANYTHING free. Either way you need to MANUALLY set scope to capture long capture BEFOREHAND (either by virtue of fixed sample memory length, or fixed time length.) And you don't want to keep scope in this ultra long capture setting all the time. It is practically unusable for normal "scoping around". Not only because it is "lot of data to process". It is simply that every capture will last 200ms even without any processing time. While discussing whether 1M WFMs/sec is better than 100k WFMs/sec is a moot point, once we start talking about 4 WFMs/sec it gets unusable for normal use. So you will go back to auto memory management or short sample length for "normal" use. Meaning every time you want to use "zoom out" you will need to setup scope memory depth manually and specifically for that and do that beforehand. So the argument " it is nice to have this for times you didn't plan for it, you just realized something, and than you just zoom out and there it is.." doesn't stand. It is always deliberate manual setup, either way. I do recognize that each person has its own way of thinking, but calling different way to achieve same thing "crippling defect" and suggesting that "people should not buy these scopes until this defect is fixed" is very, very wrong, both factually, and as a message.. It just seems unnecessarily inflammatory.. |
| nctnico:
--- Quote from: 2N3055 on June 14, 2020, 11:35:13 am ---Since many people that doesn't have (or actively use) scope that has Lecroy/Picoscope/Siglent type of memory management is absolutely sure it is evil and unusable, based on prejudice, wild accusations and no real data, here is an example why all this is a BOGUS problem. --- End quote --- I have to stop you right there... I have owned a Siglent scope and the automatic memory mode drove me nuts because it got in the way of working efficiently. So from my side there is no prejudice; only hands on experience and hard facts. I also own a Lecroy scope BTW but I got that because it was cheap and has oodles of bandwidth. Besides all that: stop attacking people's workflow and force your workflow on others. Nobody is attacking your workflow or forcing a workflow upon you. In the end it is about adding more flexibility to cater more usage scenarios and not coming up with workarounds (which don't work in all cases). |
| SilverSolder:
--- Quote from: 2N3055 on June 14, 2020, 11:35:13 am --- [...] Used Pico as example: [...] --- End quote --- The "root cause" of the whole discussion is that the typical oscilloscope doesn't have a very big screen, so the various zooming ideas being discussed are essentially ways to overcome that in a smooth and convenient way. Having the scope run on your PC gives you a whole bunch of new advantages, obviously. With a comparatively gigantic screen, you can have several windows open with different degrees of zoom. On the other hand, a PC based scope requires that you are totally comfortable with a mouse-and-keyboard workflow, rather than physical knobs. Personally, I like both approaches! |
| 2N3055:
--- Quote from: nctnico on June 14, 2020, 12:05:47 pm --- --- Quote from: 2N3055 on June 14, 2020, 11:35:13 am ---Since many people that doesn't have (or actively use) scope that has Lecroy/Picoscope/Siglent type of memory management is absolutely sure it is evil and unusable, based on prejudice, wild accusations and no real data, here is an example why all this is a BOGUS problem. --- End quote --- I have to stop you right there... I have owned a Siglent scope and the automatic memory mode drove me nuts because it got in the way of working efficiently. So from my side there is no prejudice; only hands on experience and hard facts. I also own a Lecroy scope BTW but I got that because it was cheap and has oodles of bandwidth. Besides all that: stop attacking people's workflow and force your workflow on others. Nobody is attacking your workflow or forcing a workflow upon you. In the end it is about adding more flexibility to cater more usage scenarios and not coming up with workarounds (which don't work in all cases). --- End quote --- I'm not attacking your workflow. I sad many times that I understand it works and you like it. But is not better than what I do, simply different keystrokes and way of thinking. And since nobody gave any real example of workflow where it is real impediment ,except you, that did give a real, good example of where this manual memory setting is useful (I keep giving you credit for that). This is not addressed to you but is a documented explanation how it works on Picoscope, and why many things said here are not standing... As I said, you are right about your example. But that is something I very effectively and simply accomplish on Picoscope the way it is and I guarantee you it has no "crippling defect" because it was made that way. |
| 2N3055:
--- Quote from: SilverSolder on June 14, 2020, 12:51:16 pm --- --- Quote from: 2N3055 on June 14, 2020, 11:35:13 am --- [...] Used Pico as example: [...] --- End quote --- The "root cause" of the whole discussion is that the typical oscilloscope doesn't have a very big screen, so the various zooming ideas being discussed are essentially ways to overcome that in a smooth and convenient way. Having the scope run on your PC gives you a whole bunch of new advantages, obviously. With a comparatively gigantic screen, you can have several windows open with different degrees of zoom. On the other hand, a PC based scope requires that you are totally comfortable with a mouse-and-keyboard workflow, rather than physical knobs. Personally, I like both approaches! --- End quote --- Agree. That is why I said many messages ago that this is not something that even needs different memory strategy, just reworked zoom mode. Zoom mode IS dual timebase mode. Just better screen management is needed. And I do think that problem is worse on my Keysight 3000T than on scopes with 10" and 12" screens.. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |