Picoscope- yay or nay?

[David Aurora]

I'm not a fanboy of anything.
Emulations and virtual machines are not supported on many a device that need windows.
They don't advertise that Linux and Mac version have parity.
X-Y mode not only works fine, but works even with math channels which no other scope (in normal price range) supports.
It works perfectly as advertised. You wanted to use it way you expect it to be. Your problem.
They are not primarily used as "cross platform USB scopes" but way I explained..

Fact that AD2 that is literally a didactic toy, works great for you is great. I'm glad for you.
You seem to have very specific requirements you happen to address with AD2. Great.
That doesn't make Pico bad in any way. Just not for you...
No need to use rude and abrasive language if you don't like something.

I, on the other hand, have no use for AD2 (too limited in every single aspect of it's capabilities), but have and use 3 Picos in everyday work for many years. And they are worth every penny..

"I'm not a fanboy"

*literally ignores every valid criticism of the product, twists my use case and then brags about owning 3 of them*

Cool story bro.

For the millionth time, I didn't buy one and try to force it to work on an unsupported system. I'm not running emulations, it's supposed to have native compatibility (I only mentioned Parallels as I briefly tried it on that to compare the Windows/Mac versions without having to reboot the second computer into Windows). They claim cross platform compatibility, which is why I bought one. They're not at all up front about how the non-Windows versions are either crippled, incompatible with modern systems or in perpetual beta, that's something you find out either the hard way or by deep diving the web to see how many years they've been banging on about the new version coming to solve all the problems.

You can't sit there and say things work fine when they demonstrably don't. They work fine ON YOUR OS AND HARDWARE, that's it. Despite marketing blurbs, data sheets etc claiming Mac compatibility it's a no go in any usable sense. You're welcome to prove me wrong and show me a stable, fully functional version running on a current Mac. If you can I'll place an order for one today. But you can't, because your entire, painfully repetitive input into this thread so far is "It works great as a decoder on Windows, therefore all other complaints are void".

Yet again- my "specific requirements" were a working USB oscilloscope. The AD2 delivered, the Pico did not. As in I can launch the Waveforms software and probe things like on any of my other scopes, whereas IF I could get the Picoscope software to launch (which it often didn't) I had constant hangs, glitches, triggering issues and missing basic oscilloscope features. I don't understand why you keep claiming using a USB oscilloscope as a USB oscilloscope is a niche thing, it's bizarre.

As far as whether you have any use for an AD2- I don't care and didn't ask. The thread was essentially me going "This thing sucks for me, am I alone" and the response was essentially it's pretty handy IF you run Windows and generally it's strength is more for decoding use rather than as an actual scope.

[jasonRF]

As much as I like my Picoscopes (on Windows), if I were David Aurora I would be pretty pissed, too.   The company has no excuse for claiming their software works on Macs when it doesn't.  At least it sounds like they were good about the return. 

I am finally starting to like Picoscope 7, but it still has serious flaws.  It does seem like the development is pretty slow.  To be generous, perhaps they are having problems hiring and keeping good technical staff, just like many employers right now (at least in the US).  But who knows?

jason

[David Aurora]

As much as I like my Picoscopes (on Windows), if I were David Aurora I would be pretty pissed, too.   The company has no excuse for claiming their software works on Macs when it doesn't.  At least it sounds like they were good about the return. 

I am finally starting to like Picoscope 7, but it still has serious flaws.  It does seem like the development is pretty slow.  To be generous, perhaps they are having problems hiring and keeping good technical staff, just like many employers right now (at least in the US).  But who knows?

jason

Yep, that's all I'm saying here. If they don't want the Mac/Linux/whatever hassle that's 100% fine and they don't owe it to anyone to cater to us. Just stop saying it works on the other systems when it doesn't, because it's a waste of peoples time AND they're trashing their own reputation with it. It's so much better to be known as a rock solid Windows only product than a flakey universal thing.

I've actually just downloaded the most recent beta release out of morbid curiosity (plus, part of me really wants them to pull it together as it really could be a handy product in the toolbag), I'll be curious to see how far it's come since May.

[David Aurora]

As much as I like my Picoscopes (on Windows), if I were David Aurora I would be pretty pissed, too.   The company has no excuse for claiming their software works on Macs when it doesn't.  At least it sounds like they were good about the return. 

I am finally starting to like Picoscope 7, but it still has serious flaws.  It does seem like the development is pretty slow.  To be generous, perhaps they are having problems hiring and keeping good technical staff, just like many employers right now (at least in the US).  But who knows?

jason

Yep, that's all I'm saying here. If they don't want the Mac/Linux/whatever hassle that's 100% fine and they don't owe it to anyone to cater to us. Just stop saying it works on the other systems when it doesn't, because it's a waste of peoples time AND they're trashing their own reputation with it. It's so much better to be known as a rock solid Windows only product than a flakey universal thing.

I've actually just downloaded the most recent beta release out of morbid curiosity (plus, part of me really wants them to pull it together as it really could be a handy product in the toolbag), I'll be curious to see how far it's come since May.

OK, mixed bag running the latest release on an M1 Mac.

Painfully slow to open menus, switch views etc. Chokes for half a second any time I click anything basically.

Crashed within first 30 seconds just from entering/exiting full screen mode.

XY is no longer greyed out, though I can't properly test it given I'm just running in demo mode and don't have the hardware anymore. I'll trust that it should work now though.

Some measurements don't work at all and just sit on 0.

Channels seem to come and go as they please. Like you're looking at two signals and then suddenly you're looking at one, you double check that both are turned on and they are, then you click some other random thing and you've got two channels again.

Offsets are done as percentages rather than divisions(?). I forgot how weird that was. Not the end of the world, but just why?

I still have mixed feelings about that linear equations page for scaling. I guess it's pretty flexible and I could maybe end up loving it, but something about it just irks me from a user interface point of view. Needless complication of setup.

Zoom extremely hit and miss.

Can't really be bothered digging any further for now.

So yeah, overall it's probably about the same? Some new features, some old features now broken, still very clunky. This supposedly just came out, so it doesn't seem like they're anywhere close to stable release based on this

[2N3055]

On Win it works perfectly, even with old i5-4k series..
I guess Win is what Pico users traditionally use so don't see problems
I have no idea how it works on Macs with v7, true.. What you say is not really usable , I agree.
It would be better to just say that they don't have Mac version...

[David Aurora]

On Win it works perfectly, even with old i5-4k series..
I guess Win is what Pico users traditionally use so don't see problems
I have no idea how it works on Macs with v7, true.. What you say is not really usable , I agree.
It would be better to just say that they don't have Mac version...

Exactly. Nobody would have any reason to be pissed off if they just flat out didn't offer a Mac version, it's getting jerked around being told it does/should/will/might eventually work when it doesn't that rubbed me the wrong way. At the end of the day no matter which platform you use you're paying them the same amount, so you should get the same product quality.

[boB]

I would just like to be able to annotate the traces on the screen because I can't tell which color is which !  Especially on the 8 channel Picoscope.

I do not think they have the engineering resources to work on their older product software.   

A lot of companies have trouble getting good help these days.

boB

[Zucca]

It pisses me off immensely they did not respond to my post about FreeBSD
https://www.picotech.com/support/topic42140.html?&p=148720&hilit=freebsd#p148720

it would be so cool to get some traction in [ur=https://ghostbsd.org/l]GhostBSD[/url]...

The new Picoscope 7 crashes every 3-4 hours on Hubuntu for me.

Picoscope 6 rock solid...

I bought it because of protocols support and it does not take too much real estate on the bench (since I have a PC anyway).
I also did not tested the Picoscope scope "memory", normal scope does offer only limited memory, with the PC memory for signals you should be much more....

[David Aurora]

So my demo unit arrived, and for about 3 minutes I thought things had turned around. Install went smooth, plugging the AWG into a channel basically worked, then I got super busy for a week doing some major workshop rearranging and put it aside.

Yesterday I tried to actually use it for a job and yeah, nah, this is still not a product I can see myself using for actual work. I couldn't really sum it up in text easily so I went back after hours, flicked on my phone camera and did a quick rundown of some (not all) of the issues that were immediately obvious in the first 45 minutes or whatever of use. I think at this point it's going back in the box until the first bug release arrives.

https://youtu.be/k76kXrhbVtA

[oz2cpu]

SEE this thread :

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/please-dont-purchase-pc-controlled-test-equipment/

a HUGE NAY from me to any stuff, that is ONLY control able from a PC !!
it will become trash sooner than you think, sadly..

picoscopes are very expensive, you can get a real scope, that is ALSO remote accessable,
but can still be used without a PC, the day the PC and opperating systems are out of service / compatibilities or what ever the future brings of cool computer stuff.

[David Aurora]

SEE this thread :

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/please-dont-purchase-pc-controlled-test-equipment/

a HUGE NAY from me to any stuff, that is ONLY control able from a PC !!
it will become trash sooner than you think, sadly..

picoscopes are very expensive, you can get a real scope, that is ALSO remote accessable,
but can still be used without a PC, the day the PC and opperating systems are out of service / compatibilities or what ever the future brings of cool computer stuff.

For the millionth time- for people like myself, this isn't a decision between a real scope or a USB scope. It's about ADDING a USB scope to the toolkit for portability/datalogging etc.

[egonotto]

Hello,

PicoScope 6 is far more stable.

Best regards
egonotto


PS. For audio work perhaps the PicoScope® 4262 is a good choice

[David Aurora]

Hello,

PicoScope 6 is far more stable.

Best regards
egonotto


PS. For audio work perhaps the PicoScope® 4262 is a good choice

Try using 6 on Mac 

And nah, I couldn't see myself paying any real money for a higher end model when the software is the same, because that's the whole issue. Resolution doesn't matter if the program can't run more than 10 minutes without a crash

[oz2cpu]

>For the millionth time- for people like myself, this isn't a decision between a real scope or a USB scope.
>It's about ADDING a USB scope to the toolkit for portability/datalogging etc.

for the 10k time.. i dont get it..
a real scope cost the same or less
a real scope can also provide realtime datalogging and remote access
a pico scope is not that partable, since you need a pc and all the stuff that is needed to run a pc,
so that total solution is bigger, more bulky and much more expensive, over a real stand alone scope, that will just log using its internal memory or a usb stick

[Gyro]

@oz2cpu: Do you really have to keep ramming your personal (and completely non-specific) opinion on USB test gear down peoples' throats? We get that you don't like them, we don't need constant reminders.


Edit: Emoticon removed.

[oz2cpu]

Hi gyro.. I be happy to be a little bit more specific

see this picture..  did I mention the real scope to the left, can do all the pico can, all by it self
another very important point, the scope to the left is still worth something in 10-20 years.
while the one to the right is only worth the 4 cool reuseable bnc connectors in 10-20 years.

[Gyro]

I'd call https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/please-dont-purchase-pc-controlled-test-equipment/ pretty non-specific.

[2N3055]

Hi gyro.. I be happy to be a little bit more specific

see this picture..  did I mention the real scope to the left, can do all the pico can, all by it self
another very important point, the scope to the left is still worth something in 10-20 years.
while the one to the right is only worth the 4 cool reuseable bnc connectors in 10-20 years.

No it cannot do the same thing. That IS THE POINT.

And as I said, Picsocope supported my old 212-100 with 3 consecutive software versions (4-5-6) on brand new PC of the time. So you could use 15 year old scope with new software and new PC at the time.
And in meantime, in 15 years it gained so much new functionality. For instance, it decodes 32+ protocols... And new are being added all the time..

If anything it gained value with years....

[David Aurora]

>For the millionth time- for people like myself, this isn't a decision between a real scope or a USB scope.
>It's about ADDING a USB scope to the toolkit for portability/datalogging etc.

for the 10k time.. i dont get it..
a real scope cost the same or less
a real scope can also provide realtime datalogging and remote access
a pico scope is not that partable, since you need a pc and all the stuff that is needed to run a pc,
so that total solution is bigger, more bulky and much more expensive, over a real stand alone scope, that will just log using its internal memory or a usb stick

Serious question- are you literate?

[coromonadalix]

we use one with a tablet pc, practical and fast, protocol decoding  ....  but i have some hard time managing it, i'm an oldie   

i have to combine 2 or 3 separate tools to do the same  loll

but the younger people(s) i know use it very frequently

but man they are expensives ...

It's a YAY  loll

[slugrustle]

Serious question- are you literate?

Asking this in written form must make it a trick question.

[voltsandjolts]

I'm often out on-the-go. I always carry a laptop, so choice for me is
(1) Laptop + standalone scope
(2) Laptop + USB scope
I prefer option (2) and PicoScope 5K + Picoscope 6 Win works great for me.

I tried Picoscope 7 about a year ago, but quickly decided it wasn't for me.
It's so baby blue and white - it just looks washed out to my eye.
Looking at it now on David's YT video, I'm a bit disappointed it's not more polished, it's been years in development.
Maybe Win version is more stable, IDK. But I'm sticking with 6, even if 7 gets the bugs fixed.
I don't think software engineers make the best GUI designers, looks like it needs the input of a UI designer with electronics experience.
Or just copy LeCroy (please).

I want to see Pico do well, they are quite innovative and well known for a relatively small company with just 20M turnover, 0.5M R&D expenditure. Punching above their weight really.

Edit Dec2023: Now changed my mind about Picoscope 7 software, it's actually become very good in the last few months...and dark mode, yeh!

[David Aurora]

I'm often out on-the-go. I always carry a laptop, so choice for me is
(1) Laptop + standalone scope
(2) Laptop + USB scope
I prefer option (2) and PicoScope 5K + Picoscope 6 Win works great for me.

I tried Picoscope 7 about a year ago, but quickly decided it wasn't for me.
It's so baby blue and white - it just looks washed out to my eye.
Looking at it now on David's YT video, I'm a bit disappointed it's not more polished, it's been years in development.
Maybe Win version is more stable, IDK. But I'm sticking with 6, even if 7 gets the bugs fixed.
I don't think software engineers make the best GUI designers, looks like it needs the input of a UI designer with electronics experience.
Or just copy LeCroy (please).

I want to see Pico do well, they are quite innovative and well known for a relatively small company with just 20M turnover, 0.5M R&D expenditure. Punching above their weight really.

The bit I quoted in bold is the key here really. I really, reeeeally want to like it. For basically a year since buying the one I returned I've been watching their website for updates hoping they'd get it right. For the price, form factor and software features they could knock it out of the park if they could just get the damn thing stable. What I've seen, whether beta or the new stable release just isn't that.

I'm going to try it on the Intel machine when I get some spare time this week (they've confirmed I can keep that unit if I want, so no rush to get it back) so with any luck the crashes are specific to the M1 processor and if that's isolated they can troubleshoot that area more specifically.

Has anyone tried the "stable" release of 7 on Windows yet? I'd be curious to know how that's running, but their forum is just tumbleweeds. I could try it in bootcamp/Parallels but I don't know how accurate an assessment that's going to be

[mendip_discovery]

I want to see Pico do well, they are quite innovative and well known for a relatively small company with just 20M turnover, 0.5M R&D expenditure. Punching above their weight really.

I think that is why I have a soft spot for them. I have two of the TC-08 temp dataloggers and they are not the best thing in the world but they are one of the more affordable solutions.

With regards to the comments about portability of a proper scope vs pico. LoL. The pico can go in the bag with your laptop that most service engineers need with them. The box weight is just a few hundred grams and is in a fairly robust case, I could drop it down the stairs and it would no doubt still work.

The software does have its moments, the picolog takes and age to start up on my laptop and does the job but I cant see why it takes so long.

[jasonRF]

Has anyone tried the "stable" release of 7 on Windows yet? I'd be curious to know how that's running, but their forum is just tumbleweeds. I could try it in bootcamp/Parallels but I don't know how accurate an assessment that's going to be

I have used the most recent stable version of Picoscope 7 under Windows.  Overall it seems to work well and the touchscreen interface is reasonable.  I haven't tested all of the features - in particular have not attempted to use any of the serial decoding since I mostly just do analog stuff.  But the features I use seem to all be there now and work fine, including the math channels.  The streaming-mode operation is better than in Picoscope 6 in that the measurements/stats seem to work properly, which will probably only matter to folks that have the shallow-memory models like my 2204a.  For ~2 hour sessions it has been stable but I haven't tried running it for hours on end. 

Edit: I have had a recent early access version running continuously for a handful of days with no problem. 

The main thing I miss from 6 at this point is the user-defined keyboard shortcuts.  Especially when running from a laptop on-the-go, doing everything with the mouse-pad or the touchscreen is a little annoying. 

Since I am on windows I usually just use the most recent version.  It is nice that the installers automatically include 'early access' in the name of versions that aren't officially listed as 'stable' so you can easily have both on your machine without getting confused. 

jason