| Products > Test Equipment |
| Oscilloscope Zoom Out Quirk |
| << < (84/113) > >> |
| Someone:
Still rolling on... different scopes word differently! OMG! None of them is perfect and there isn't one true way to manage memory. Let the users pick what they want, rather than insisting others should blindly believe your ways are best. |
| nctnico:
--- Quote from: 2N3055 on June 15, 2020, 06:42:17 pm --- --- Quote from: tv84 on June 15, 2020, 05:00:54 pm ---Dave's video already shows the "problem" explicitly (at least for my knowledge level). The rest of the rumblings are different ways of explaining the thing (with more or less expert details) but, in the end, after all the juice has been squeezed, all come down to the same. Those that disagree with this analysis, have misunderstood the simplicity of the bad/wrong (strike the one that makes you itchy) implementation that Dave's has showed in the video. --- End quote --- What Dave have shown is good explanation how Siglent scope works. I agree that they should add manual memory management if they can, just because. It can't hurt. I'm not disagreeing with Dave's findings. I'm fine with the fact that Nico uses something and it works for him. My problem with Nico's interpretation is that he keeps saying things that are simply not true... I show example with 1 million zoom factor that disproves his statements, he says that if I chose different timebase it would be different. It wouldn't. I know how my scope works, I'm the one that use it on daily basis. He says Siglent scopes can't show zoomed data without losing detail few posts down from image from Elasia that clearly shows it can do it.. I really don't care much for that. I know I can be very stubborn sometimes. Not very often, but I simply cannot stand that incorrect is being sold as correct by repetition, false argumentation and misdirection. --- End quote --- And it doesn't occur to you that you are simply misunderstanding what I'm trying to point out? I know I'm not the best one to explain things so it is not entirely your fault. I don't know how I can get you to see the subtle nuances you are missing -again my shortcoming-. You using other oscilloscopes besides one from Siglent doesn't help either because the behaviour this thread is about is very specific for how auto memory length works. However saying people tell lies because you don't understand their point is not the smartest move to make. |
| Elasia:
--- Quote from: Someone on June 15, 2020, 11:56:48 pm ---Still rolling on... different scopes word differently! OMG! None of them is perfect and there isn't one true way to manage memory. Let the users pick what they want, rather than insisting others should blindly believe your ways are best. --- End quote --- :horse: :rant: :horse: :palm: |
| Someone:
--- Quote from: nctnico on June 16, 2020, 12:01:04 am --- --- Quote from: 2N3055 on June 15, 2020, 06:42:17 pm --- --- Quote from: tv84 on June 15, 2020, 05:00:54 pm ---Dave's video already shows the "problem" explicitly (at least for my knowledge level). The rest of the rumblings are different ways of explaining the thing (with more or less expert details) but, in the end, after all the juice has been squeezed, all come down to the same. Those that disagree with this analysis, have misunderstood the simplicity of the bad/wrong (strike the one that makes you itchy) implementation that Dave's has showed in the video. --- End quote --- What Dave have shown is good explanation how Siglent scope works. I agree that they should add manual memory management if they can, just because. It can't hurt. I'm not disagreeing with Dave's findings. I'm fine with the fact that Nico uses something and it works for him. My problem with Nico's interpretation is that he keeps saying things that are simply not true... I show example with 1 million zoom factor that disproves his statements, he says that if I chose different timebase it would be different. It wouldn't. I know how my scope works, I'm the one that use it on daily basis. He says Siglent scopes can't show zoomed data without losing detail few posts down from image from Elasia that clearly shows it can do it.. I really don't care much for that. I know I can be very stubborn sometimes. Not very often, but I simply cannot stand that incorrect is being sold as correct by repetition, false argumentation and misdirection. --- End quote --- And it doesn't occur to you that you are simply misunderstanding what I'm trying to point out? I know I'm not the best one to explain things so it is not entirely your fault. I don't know how I can get you to see the subtle nuances you are missing -again my shortcoming-. You using other oscilloscopes besides one from Siglent doesn't help either because the behaviour this thread is about is very specific for how auto memory length works. However saying people tell lies because you don't understand their point is not the smartest move to make. --- End quote --- You've continually made "can't be done" statements without putting all the conditions/assumptions required to back that up. Between you and Dave its just another fanboy rant at this stage. |
| nctnico:
I stated the exact conditions several times in several way so you can try it yourself. But be aware that this is expert equipment use. Like pro-athletes who need shoes that have a tiny, insignificant looking tweak that makes all the difference between losing and winning. Anyway, there is not much need for further discussion. It appears Siglent is working on adding new features to the memory management so you can force full memory depth. At least they see and understand the value and that is all that matters. (Hopefully) we end up with more oscilloscopes to choose from so mission accomplised. As tv84 put it so elegantly: That will benefit even the current Siglent advocates! And some/many of them have yet to understand that benefit. Or let's pull in a quote from Albert Einstein. He wasn't so subtle: Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds. >:D |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |