Products > Test Equipment
Ridiculously small Rigol DS1000z series font size
<< < (17/35) > >>
marmad:

--- Quote from: i4004 on November 30, 2014, 08:01:39 pm ---i dislike "experience arguments", they mean the argument is in the toilet, once we come to that.
experience doesn't matter but what is said.

--- End quote ---

 ;D  Ha, ha... this is truly hilarious. YOU were the one to first bring up experience/expertise at least twice in your other posts:


--- Quote from: i4004 on November 30, 2014, 08:40:21 am ---as for this other things, you would need more experience with video and image processing (and how does it translate in the "quality metrics" in the brain) to understand it a bit better
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: i4004 on November 30, 2014, 08:30:46 am ---...and we'll also talk about pixelization by lower resoltuion, which seems not really quite your field of expertise.....

--- End quote ---

...and then when I respond that I've been teaching in the field of computer graphics, all of a sudden "experience doesn't matter".

That is truly classic deflection... and - in terms of my responding to you - the proverbial straw.

Anyway, as amusing as this has occasionally been, your posts have been - and continue to be - a massive waste of my time. So, after 3 and a half years on this forum, I've finally run into someone worthy of my"Ignore List".

Congratulations... you win!

And adios from my feed.
nixfu:
Anyone complaining about the screens/fonts on the new Rigol scopes has never used an old scope like a digital analog storage scope with those horribly hard to read screens and characters, or for that matter the previous generation screens that were tiny like on the old Rigol DS1052E with their jagged fonts and all.
Towger:

--- Quote from: nixfu on December 02, 2014, 05:44:31 am ---Anyone complaining about the screens/fonts on the new Rigol scopes has never used an old scope like a digital analog storage scope with those horribly hard to read screens and characters, or for that matter the previous generation screens that were tiny like on the old Rigol DS1052E with their jagged fonts and all.

--- End quote ---

I have been following this thread and I have to agree with you. It is a great value budget scope and the display is very good for price.
pa3bca:

--- Quote from: marmad on December 02, 2014, 04:43:14 am ---Let's rewind for a minute. Has anyone else actually complained that the DS1000Z display is washed-out (in the classic sense of the term)? As I mentioned above, I first wrote that the display was washed out because of my camera angle to the LCD. You erroneously repeated my comment as if I was stating that the display was "washed-out" (which I wasn't). I erroneously re-used your mistaken comment to indicate the problem that I perceived with the blacks and whites (when compared to the DS2000) - although I tried to correct my misuse in a later post.

The DS1000Z display is not washed out. But the blacks and whites are a little further from 'true' than the DS2000 display.

--- End quote ---
Ok we agree that the 1074Z's display does not look washed out. But for instance from your replies #52 and especially #57 you might see how I got the impression that you found it is washed out (somewhat, i.e more than the 2000). All cleared up now.

--- Quote from: marmad on December 02, 2014, 04:43:14 am ---Nope, sorry, you don't have an above normal DS1000Z screen  :)  I saw (and continue to see) the difference in blacks between the two DSOs in your photos (just as I see it in the two DSOs in front of me). Then again, as I mentioned, I'm extremely sensitive to it (having taught in graphics for years) - so i would agree that it's not a big deal.

--- End quote ---
So it is my eyes... well I can live with that!  :)


--- Quote from: nixfu on December 02, 2014, 05:44:31 am ---Anyone complaining about the screens/fonts on the new Rigol scopes has never used an old scope like a digital analog storage scope with those horribly hard to read screens and characters, or for that matter the previous generation screens that were tiny like on the old Rigol DS1052E with their jagged fonts and all.

--- End quote ---
How true! My posts to this forum were not meant to find fault(s) with the 1074Z! On the contrary, I do think the 1000Z series are a terrific value for money. Just some fact-finding abt the differences and the underlying causes.
You want a better screen and performance? Maybe a $ 13.000 Agilent or Tek?
Mark_O:

--- Quote from: Towger on December 02, 2014, 06:15:22 am ---
--- Quote from: nixfu on December 02, 2014, 05:44:31 am ---Anyone complaining about the screens/fonts on the new Rigol scopes has never used an old scope like a digital analog storage scope with those horribly hard to read screens and characters, or for that matter the previous generation screens that were tiny like on the old Rigol DS1052E with their jagged fonts and all.

--- End quote ---

I have been following this thread and I have to agree with you. It is a great value budget scope and the display is very good for price.

--- End quote ---

I agree with you both.  It's all relative, so those w/o much experience may not realize just how good they've got it.  And the DS1054z is so good that some folks have to put it under the microscope to find things to complain about (and I'm not referring to Marmad here).  It's a superlative scope at it's price point, and phenomenally affordable.  Though it's not perfect, and doesn't do everything more expensive scopes may do.  'Shortcomings' of virtually all scopes ever made.

The DS1054z is a case-study in how making mostly small design decisions can retain high value/functionality, yet cut costs to the bone and maximize bang for the buck.  All w/o negatively impacting the value proposition for their higher series scope lines (which is an important consideration).
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod