Products > Test Equipment
Rigol DHO814 or Siglent SDS1104X-U
tautech:
--- Quote from: hwasti on October 28, 2024, 08:49:20 am ---You have a very good point about the user interface being a make or break issue. I had not put it up as high as I should have on the priority list.
--- End quote ---
Not such an issue with a mouse (and touch) capable GUI.
With all the models I use, I use the encoders and mouse control and only the touch display on my own scopes.
However with a DSO on a shelf, mouse control becomes very convenient.
coromonadalix:
i have Rigols and Siglents .... but i go to Siglent in my case i became fed up with rigol sw ...
Siglent for me are better documented, and better priced
no failures on both brands so far, keep the FW updated for sure, free "cough" options for both brands, really depend of the needs you have, and maybe some differences in / out connections in some cases
Hdmi would be useful in some instances ...
for the Rigol scope ( i have a bkank 1054 i think) vs the Siglent sds 1000x, both 100M to 200Mhz upgrades / probes upgrades too, the Siglent triggering was better than Rigol in faint pulses / events, and Rigol scroll knob menu jumps a lot with he encoder wheel. ?
my 2 cents
ebastler:
--- Quote from: tautech on October 28, 2024, 09:19:56 am ---
--- Quote from: hwasti on October 28, 2024, 08:49:20 am ---You have a very good point about the user interface being a make or break issue. I had not put it up as high as I should have on the priority list.
--- End quote ---
Not such an issue with a mouse (and touch) capable GUI.
With all the models I use, I use the encoders and mouse control and only the touch display on my own scopes.
However with a DSO on a shelf, mouse control becomes very convenient.
--- End quote ---
You may have misunderstood hwasti's point. Based on my earlier comments, I assume he was mainly referring to the playfulness vs. seriousness of the graphical UI, the arrangement of parameters in a single menu vs. multiple side bars, and the space-efficiency of the screen layout.
Siglent and Rigol aim for different trade-offs there, and it will largely be a matter of personal preference which solution one likes better. Driven also by experience with other scopes, and how frequently/routinely one uses the scope and some of its advanced functions.
tautech:
--- Quote from: ebastler on October 28, 2024, 10:38:03 am ---
--- Quote from: tautech on October 28, 2024, 09:19:56 am ---
--- Quote from: hwasti on October 28, 2024, 08:49:20 am ---You have a very good point about the user interface being a make or break issue. I had not put it up as high as I should have on the priority list.
--- End quote ---
Not such an issue with a mouse (and touch) capable GUI.
With all the models I use, I use the encoders and mouse control and only the touch display on my own scopes.
However with a DSO on a shelf, mouse control becomes very convenient.
--- End quote ---
You may have misunderstood hwasti's point. Based on my earlier comments, I assume he was mainly referring to the playfulness vs. seriousness of the graphical UI, the arrangement of parameters in a single menu vs. multiple side bars, and the space-efficiency of the screen layout.
--- End quote ---
Not at all when I know where he's come from.
IMO the current Siglent UI will be the best fit with his previous experience plus offer the touch and mouse benefits for speed of use.
hwasti:
My point was that if the scope is sitting on the bench and I am primarily looking at a monitor on the wall, using touch screen menus will be very impractical. To use a touchscreen, you need to be looking at the screen.
With the monitor on the wall, everything that one would reasonably want to do during a work session should be doable using knobs and buttons.
This does not apply to infrequently done things like setting up the scope. I can stick my nose right up to the scope to be able to see tiny text.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version