Rigol DS4000 series VS Keysight 3000T Better Value?

[commie]

The 3000 is probably more of a VW Golf, the bread and butter mid range mainstream unit with the 2000 a Polo and the 1000 an Up. The range then goes all the way up through the Bentleys, Lambos and Bugatti high end, those that sell far fewer but are high performance and high value.

I don't think so, as dadler is finding out by himself their are no high end scopes available to buy any more.

[Howardlong]

The 3000 is probably more of a VW Golf, the bread and butter mid range mainstream unit with the 2000 a Polo and the 1000 an Up. The range then goes all the way up through the Bentleys, Lambos and Bugatti high end, those that sell far fewer but are high performance and high value.

I don't think so, as dadler is finding out by himself their are no high end scopes available to buy any more.

Apparently so!

[dadler]

Maybe it's not a good idea for individuals to purchase from the big names like Keysight etc. You just aren't important enough to warrant good service. Unless you are a big account, you just kinda get ignored.

Not really. The problem are the resellers, which in my experience for most part are absolutely useless if the task involves anything which goes beyond picking a box from storage, slapping an address label on top and sending it off.

If I wanted to buy a DSOX3000T (which I wouldn't, but never mind) then I'd get it through Keysight directly. I might pay a bit more but the hassle is a lot less. It's different if I were to buy some Rigol or Siglent kit (because they have no own sales channel), but certainly not for something like a $3k big brand scope.

Yeah, I retrospect I regret going through Tequipment. I just have had great experiences with them in the past and wanted them to get my business (plus it was cheaper). But the small cost difference was not worth this headache... if I could do it over again I would do just that.

And I don't know. The DSOX3000T kinda seems low-end to me. I suppose all kitted out it is like $20k, so it's not exactly cheap. Maybe I am just very underwhelmed with the build quality and trying to justify it by calling the scope low-end =P

[Wuerstchenhund]

And I don't know. The DSOX3000T kinda seems low-end to me. I suppose all kitted out it is like $20k, so it's not exactly cheap. Maybe I am just very underwhelmed with the build quality and trying to justify it by calling the scope low-end =P

Well, the DSOX3000T *is* a low-end scope (and I doubt even at the overinflated list prices with the options paid for it a DSOX3014T would have cost even anything close to $20k), the fact that they added touch functionality what's essentially the old DSOX3k doesn't change that.

And as I said, the build quality of the more expensive models of the DSOX family isn't better. I really like Agilent/Keysight kit but the DSOX I find pretty poor, not just the 3000 Series but also the bigger models (the higher you get the more unattractive they become).

These days there simply are better alternatives out there in their price class, unless you really require one of the options that are only available on the DSOX3k(T) (i.e. audio).

I can't say I'd ever consider the Keysight 3000 series "low end". The 1000 and possibly basement 2000's, maybe, but I suppose everything's relative.

The 3000 is probably more of a VW Golf, the bread and butter mid range mainstream unit with the 2000 a Polo and the 1000 an Up.

Well, as most of the times when car analogies are brought up they also fail in this case. Test instruments aren't cars, and the T&M market has pretty much *nothing* in common with the car market.

The DSOX3k(T) is definitely a low-end scope due to its price (although Keysight is really pushing it), functionality and performance (100MHz to 1GHz bandwidth, low memory, simple math and measurements, very basic FFT, weak processing). The DSOX2000 is nothing more than a DSOX3000 which has been artificially crippled to create a model between the bottom-of-the-barrel 1000 Series and the DSOX30000. But that doesn't change the fact that all these are low-end scopes.

[Howardlong]

Well, the But that doesn't change the fact that all these are low-end scopes.

That is your opinion, and you're very welcome to it. I don't think the car analogy was at all inappropriate, and you didn't give a reason why it "failed", so I guess without that justification we'll have to disagree on that. I thought, and still think, it's quite a valid comparison.

I do agree that some aspects of the 3000 are a little backward such as waveform screen resolution and memory depth, but there are also positive aspects such as the 1Mwfm/s. I wouldn't call a 4 or 5Gsa/s scope with a bandwidth up to 1GHz low end. 100MHz perhaps, but bandwidth isn't everything depending on your application. For audio work I'd say the 3000 is way up there for example.

I think we're all well aware that you regularly have the luxury of driving five figure scopes at work and find them to be run of the mill to you, but not everyone sits in that position, very few in fact.

http://youtu.be/K2k1iRD2f-c

I drive a Veyron by the way. 

[Wuerstchenhund]

Well, the But that doesn't change the fact that all these are low-end scopes.

That is your opinion, and you're very welcome to it.

That's not just my opinion, that's simply the standard way the scope segments are divided in the T&M industry. You can ignore it of course but that doesn't change how the market is divided.

Keysight's low-end goes from the DSO1000 Series (entry-level) over the DSOX2000 (mid-entry) to the DSOX3000(T) (upper low-end). The midrange starts with the DSOX4000 and end in the DSOX6000. The high-end range starts with the DSO9000(H) (lower high-end), and goes over the DSO(X)90k(A) Series (mid high-end) to the S, V and Z Series (upper high-end).

LeCroy's low-end goes from the WaveAce (entry-level) over the WaveJet (mid-entry) to the WaveSurfer 3000 (upper low-end). The midrange starts with the WaveSurfer 10 and the HDO4000 (lower midrange) and ends with the WaveSurfer Xs-B and the HDO6000/8000 Series (upper midrange). The high-end starts with the WaveRunner 6zi (lower high-end), goes over the WavePro 7zi (mid high-end) and WaveMaster 8zi (upper high-end), and ends with the LabMaster (ultra high end).

R&S' low-end is populated by the Hameg HMO Series (entry level to upper low-end), the midrange starts with the RTM (lower midrange) and ends with the RTE (upper midrange), and the RTO (actually a lower high-end scope) is their only high-end variant.

If you talk with manufacturer sales and read their internal marketing training material you'll see that this is how the scopes are categorized in this day and age.

I don't think the car analogy was at all inappropriate, and you didn't give a reason why it "failed", so I guess without that justification we'll have to disagree on that. I thought, and still think, it's quite a valid comparison.

It isn't, for various reasons. First, cars are bought emotionally, which is completely contrary to test equipment which is predominantly bought after a more or less hard set of requirements. When a hobbyist buys a scope some emotional component might be involved, but that's still not the same as the car market where emotions play a large part of a purchase decision (which is why advertising mostly plays to the emotional side, hence the often silly commercials).

Also, cars have much more variety than scopes. VW (like other car manufacturers) not only offer hatchbacks but also sedans, station wagons, SUVs, Crossovers, Vans, plus a number of high-powered sports variants, pretty much across most (all?) segments. All of them allow tons of options, plus most models are available with a variety of different engines and transmissions (and some even with four wheel drive). People interested in say a hatchback might not be interested in a sedan or SUV variant but would probably consider the hatchback variant of the smaller car, while a station wagon customer might consider the SUV variant as well. A customer interested in the sports version of a sedan might not consider the sports version of the SUV or Crossover variant but might consider the sports version of the Station Wagon variant, and so on. With cars, there are much more differentiators than just the 'class' (i.e. sub-compact, compact, midrange, luxury, etc), thanks to a gazillion of options a sub-midrange car like say an Audi A4 can be ordered with engines and options of that available two classes above, leaving essentially just the smaller size of the car as a differentiator. Can you do that with a scope, i.e. ordering the processing, sampling and memory capabilities of a upper midrange model for an entry level scope? No, you can't.

I do agree that some aspects of the 3000 are a little backward such as waveform screen resolution and memory depth, but there are also positive aspects such as the 1Mwfm/s. I wouldn't call a 4 or 5Gsa/s scope with a bandwidth up to 1GHz low end. 100MHz perhaps, but bandwidth isn't everything depending on your application. For audio work I'd say the 3000 is way up there for example.

Aside from the fact that audio work isn't really demanding, 5GSa/s, up to 1GHz, small screen and limited processing/FFT/Maths simply puts the DSOX3000(T) right into the low end segment. I agree that some of its specs would have been considered midrange say 10 years ago, but they're simply not in 2015.

I think we're all well aware that you regularly have the luxury of driving five figure scopes at work and find them to be run of the mill to you, but not everyone sits in that position, very few in fact.

Right, but so what? Coming back to car analogies you seem to love, do you think a compact hatchback like a VW Golf turns into a luxury vehicle just because the buyer can't afford something better? I don't think so.

So why should it be the case for scopes?

[Howardlong]

I am not party to these mysterious "internal documents" you reference so without them I'll keep to my opinion.

The plethora of options available and choices for cars actually strengthens the case for the case of the analogy as far as I could see, it wasn't clear to me what point you were trying to make I'm afraid.

I didn't ever say that the VW Golf is a luxury vehicle, although 25 years ago when I bought my first brand new car, a VW Golf GTi convertible, to me it did seem pretty close.

Anyway, agree or not, I don't think an analogy between scopes and cars is something to get too uptight about, so instead, I'll pour myself a coffee, draw up a chair, and relax with a bit of $7k low-end scoping. 

[HighVoltage]

Well, I consider my Agilent MSO7104B and my MSOX3104A luxury scopes and enjoy them every time I use them. I know that Keysight offers scopes in the 1/2 Million Dollar range, but would I really use that much scope and enjoy it?
Its all very relative, I guess.
 
 

[Wuerstchenhund]

Well, I consider my Agilent MSO7104B and my MSOX3104A luxury scopes and enjoy them every time I use them. I know that Keysight offers scopes in the 1/2 Million Dollar range, but would I really use that much scope and enjoy it?
Its all very relative, I guess.

That's perfectly fine, but of course misses the point, which is that in as much as the current scope market goes the MSO7104B is a midrange scope and the MSOX3104A a low-end scope, and unfortunately that classification is completely independent of the owner's feelings.

This aside, and to make it perfectly clear, there's absolutely nothing wrong with a low-end scope, which contrary to what some people seem to belief isn't a derogatory term but simply a classification in the grand scheme of things.

[Howardlong]

Well, I consider my Agilent MSO7104B and my MSOX3104A luxury scopes and enjoy them every time I use them. I know that Keysight offers scopes in the 1/2 Million Dollar range, but would I really use that much scope and enjoy it?
Its all very relative, I guess.

Sorry to go a bit OT, how do you find the MSOX3104A as compared to the MSO7104B, particularly in terms of screen/waveform resolution and size, but also any other comments you may have? I have the 7104B, which I like primarily for the super responsive UI and reasonable XGA resolution, although I find the screen size is perhaps a little on the unnecessarily large side at times, but it is super clear.

[Wuerstchenhund]

I am not party to these mysterious "internal documents" you reference so without them I'll keep to my opinion.

That's completely fine, you're of course free to ignore common categorization and invent your own 

The plethora of options available and choices for cars actually strengthens the case for the case of the analogy as far as I could see, it wasn't clear to me what point you were trying to make I'm afraid.

The point is that with cars you can mix and match to a great extend, something you can't do in a similar manner with scopes (again, can you get a low end scope with tiny screen but the processing/FFT/math of the high end model? I don't think so). Plus you ignored the point about cars being purchased mostly on an emotional basis, much more so than test equipment.

The common thing is that both markets have items and people that buy these items, but that's about it. You could as well have used the market of cheese cake sales on the Cornish coast as a similar example, it would have been similarly unrepresentative.

But as I said, you're of course free to make up your own categories, even if they don't reflect what the rest of the industry uses. You shouldn't be surprised if that leads to misunderstandings, though.

[Howardlong]

Maybe it's not a good idea for individuals to purchase from the big names like Keysight etc. You just aren't important enough to warrant good service. Unless you are a big account, you just kinda get ignored.

Not really. The problem are the resellers, which in my experience for most part are absolutely useless if the task involves anything which goes beyond picking a box from storage, slapping an address label on top and sending it off.

If I wanted to buy a DSOX3000T (which I wouldn't, but never mind) then I'd get it through Keysight directly. I might pay a bit more but the hassle is a lot less. It's different if I were to buy some Rigol or Siglent kit (because they have no own sales channel), but certainly not for something like a $3k big brand scope.

I would directly compare the Keysight 3000A/T series to the Lecroy Wavesurfer 3000 series. There are pros and cons to both, but the bandwidth ranges, sample rates and features are roughly equivalent. The two big negatives on the Agilent compared to the WS3000 series are the screen/waveform resolution and the lack of LAN port as standard, but the latter can be rectified. On the other hand the Lecroy maxes out at 130kwfm/s compared to the Agilent's 1Mwfm/s, and has multiplexed vertical controls (offset though I would imagine by the touch screen). Swings and roundabouts everywhere as far as I can see.

The 4000 is essentially a 3000T with a bigger telly.

[Wuerstchenhund]

I would directly compare the Keysight 3000A/T series to the Lecroy Wavesurfer 3000 series.

I agree, both serve comparable market segments.

There are pros and cons to both, but the bandwidth ranges, sample rates and features are roughly equivalent. The two big negatives on the Agilent compared to the WS3000 series are the screen/waveform resolution and the lack of LAN port as standard, but the latter can be rectified. On the other hand the Lecroy maxes out at 130kwfm/s compared to the Agilent's 1Mwfm/s, and has multiplexed vertical controls (offset though I would imagine by the touch screen). Swings and roundabouts everywhere as far as I can see.

Not sure I'd say it's roughly the same:

• The Wavesurfer comes with a larger screen with higher resolution (10.1" 1024x600 vs 8.4" 800x480 with the DSOX3kT)
• For scopes with bandwidths up to 1GHz I'd say in practical terms 4GSa/s and 10Mpts is probably much more useful than 5GSa/s and only 4Mpts memory
• FFT with the WaveSurfer is up to 1Mpts while the DSOX3kT uses only 64kpts which is pretty poor
• The WaveSurfer allows automatic and manual sample memory/sample rate management while the DSOX3kT is automatic only
• Unlike the DSOX3kT, which feature-wise is not that much better than the DSOX2k, the WaveSurfer 3000 has many features that can be found in LeCroy's high-end scopes, i.e. WaveScan and LabNotebook.
• The DSOX3kT has nothing comparable to WaveScan, which is a very versatile tool to find rare glitches and other issues and which works 'live' as well as on sampled data.
• The DSOX3kT also doesn't offer anything comparable to LabNotebook, which is a documentation tool and pretty neat if you have to document your measurements in some standardized format.
• The WaveSurfer 3000 uses the same probe interface (ProBus) all midrange and high-end scope from LeCroy use since the mid '90s, which means there's a wide range of suitable active probes out there, including a lot of second-hand ones which often sell for reasonable prices because they don't carry the "Tektronix" or "Agilent" label
• Integrated AWG: 25MHz 125MSa/s 14bit with 16kpts on the WaveSurfer, 20MHz 100MSa/s 10bit with 8kpts on the DSOX3kT (both not great, but still)
• LAN is standard on the WaveSurfer 3000 while it's a $400 option on the already expensive DSO3kT
• Not that important, but the WaveSurfer has four (2x front, 2x rear) USB host ports (Keysight two, one front one rear)
• Plus the WaveSurfer 3000 is noticably cheaper than the DSOX3kT

Yes, the WaveSurfer has single vertical controls for all channels (which are also swapped, i.e. horizontal is left and vertical is right, as it's tradition with LeCroy), but my experience is that this is something one gets used to pretty quickly *if* the scope is used somewhat regularly. I agree that it can be confusing for some people who use such a scope on the odd occasion only.

Don't get me wrong, the 1M wfms/s update rate of the DSOX3kT is impressive in the low-end segment, but Keysight has painted itself a bit into a corner there when they decided to go for high waveform rates as top priority (which they've done mostly for marketing reasons). For finding glitches or other signal deviations I'd take a slower scope which has WaveScan or a similar tool over a high waveform rate DSOX3kT any day. 130k wfms/s are in my opinion more than good enough for an entry level scope, and overall I'd say the WaveSurfer 3000 is the much more well rounded scope than the DSOX3kT which really only excells in its max waveform update rate and trails in most other properties that are important for a general purpose scope.

Aside from the waveform update rate, the only thing that really speaks for the DSOX3kT is the list of available options, which includes some pretty rare ones (i.e. I2S audio trigger). The WaveSurfer 3000 has a much shorter list, although LeCroy is working on adding more options through updates, as they've done already (i.e. CAN, AWG, DVM) since the scope came out mid-2014.

I'm not saying the DSOX3kT is a bad scope, but in my opinion for what it offers it's pretty much overpriced.

[GlowingGhoul]

Maybe it's not a good idea for individuals to purchase from the big names like Keysight etc. You just aren't important enough to warrant good service. Unless you are a big account, you just kinda get ignored.

Not really. The problem are the resellers, which in my experience for most part are absolutely useless if the task involves anything which goes beyond picking a box from storage, slapping an address label on top and sending it off.

If I wanted to buy a DSOX3000T (which I wouldn't, but never mind) then I'd get it through Keysight directly. I might pay a bit more but the hassle is a lot less. It's different if I were to buy some Rigol or Siglent kit (because they have no own sales channel), but certainly not for something like a $3k big brand scope.

You seem intent on disparaging the 3000T with inaccurate and subjective statements. It's specs saw a nice bump over the 3000A in both memory(doubled) and sampling speed(25% boost) despite your claim of a touchscreen simply being stuck on a 3000A. Slow processing? What are you talking about? What's faster in its class?

What "alternatives" are clearly superior in it's price range? I'd love to hear it. Rigol? Owon? Something from Tek or R&S?

As far as build quality, all modern electronics feel flimsy in comparison to built like a tank CRO's of old. There's nothing wrong with Keysight's materials or construction on my 3000t. Encoders never miss a click, ever.

The wavesurfer 3000 is considerably MORE expensive, with fewer features, a sampling rate that 65% slower, smaller selection of options, etc, etc.

Also, for whatever reason Tequiptment seems to be on the fringes of the Keysight dealer network. The bad feeling I got when they knew nothing about the free app bundle, after a week of trying to get a straight answer, convinced my to buy elsewhere.

[dadler]

With all the free options (if you can get them! ARGH!), I think the 3000T series is a great value right now. After November 30th, perhaps not so much.

[GlowingGhoul]

With all the free options (if you can get them! ARGH!), I think the 3000T series is a great value right now. After November 30th, perhaps not so much.

I had an issue with the app bundle and they took very good care of me. I never got through to a senior engineer from customer service in under 2 minutes before.

[Wuerstchenhund]

You seem intent on disparaging the 3000T with inaccurate and subjective statements.

If you call the Keysight's data sheets "disparaging" then I guess you're right.

It's specs saw a nice bump over the 3000A in both memory(doubled) and sampling speed(25% boost) despite your claim of a touchscreen simply being stuck on a 3000A.

Wrong. The 1GHz variant of the DSOX3kA already came with 5GSa/s (only the smaller bandwidth models were limited to 4GSa/s), and 4Mpts was already available on the DSOX3kA as well, although as an option.

And I'm sure you can explain why you believe 5GSa/s is such an advantage over 4GSa/s sample rate on a scope with a bandwidth of 1GHz or less? Especially since the much smaller memory on the Keysight means you can capture a lot less (and the sample rate will drop much lower on longer timebase settings).

Slow processing? What are you talking about? What's faster in its class?

Fast? Right.    FFT on the WaveSurfer is pretty fast, as is the DSOX3kT (based on the videos Keysight and others have put up, it's the same as the DSOX3kA, which we have several in our labs), but the difference is that the WaveSurfer processes 16 times the amount of data!

The wavesurfer 3000 is considerably MORE expensive, with fewer features, a sampling rate that 65% slower, smaller selection of options, etc, etc.

Yeah, right:

DSOX3012T 100MHz 2Ch - $3,350 (Tequipment $3,316)
http://www.keysight.com/en/pd-2483807-pn-DSOX3012T/oscilloscope-100-mhz-2-channels?nid=-32756.1114212&cc=US&lc=eng
http://www.tequipment.net/Agilent/DSOX3012T/Digital-Oscilloscopes/?search=true

vs

WaveSurfer 3022 200MHz 2Ch - $3,199 (LeCroy list price is $3000 but market prices have actually gone up)
http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/WAVESURFER%203022/WAVESURFER%203022-ND/4897128

Or

DSOX3034T 350MHz 4Ch ´- $8,300 (Tequipment $8,217)
http://www.keysight.com/en/pd-2486117-pn-DSOX3034T/oscilloscope-350-mhz-4-channels?nid=-32756.1114202&cc=US&lc=eng
http://www.tequipment.net/Agilent/DSOX3034T/Digital-Oscilloscopes/?search=true

vs

LeCroy WaveSurfer 3034 350MHz 4Ch - $5,499
http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/WAVESURFER%203034/WAVESURFER%203034-ND/4897130


Or

DSOX3054T 500MHz 4Ch - $11,200 (Tequipment $11,088)
http://www.keysight.com/en/pd-2486131-pn-DSOX3054T/oscilloscope-500-mhz-4-channels?nid=-32756.1114205&cc=US&lc=eng
http://www.tequipment.net/Agilent/DSOX3054T/Digital-Oscilloscopes/?search=true

vs

WaveSurfer 3054 500MHz 4Ch - $6,949
http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/WAVESURFER%203054/WAVESURFER%203054-ND/4897131

BTW, for less than the price of the 500MHz 4Ch Keysight you can even get a 1GHz WaveSurfer 10:

http://www.digikey.com/product-search/en?mpart=WAVESURFER%2010&v=1133

Any more nonsense to spread?   

[dadler]

On a side note, Newark is saying that the bandwidth upgrade license code that I ordered is "backordered" (by Keysight) until September.

I have no idea how a license code can be backordered. 

That LeCroy does seem like a nice scope. What options does it come with? I only went for the Agilent due to the option bundle. Are they bandwidth upgradable (via software or mail-in retrofit)?

[Electro Fan]

On a side note, Keysight is saying that the bandwidth upgrade license code that I ordered is "backordered" until September.

I have no idea how a license code can be backordered. 

That LeCroy does seem like a nice scope. What options does it come with? I only went for the Agilent due to the option bundle. Are they bandwidth upgradable (via software or mail-in retrofit)?

I guess they have to schedule them - you know, order all the parts (bits and bytes?), qc the incoming parts, put the parts on shelves in inventory, get the parts from the inventory shelves to the factory floor, assemble them in batches, test the assembled product (bits/bytes/license?), print the documentation, put all the pieces in a box, ship them from the factory to the distribution centers and have them ready for shipment to partners and eventually to customers.   

Seriously, I think someone must have been confused or given you bad info, it is hard to believe that what should be a downloadable software license can be backordered for a month.... especially when they are running a special promotion on an offering with the license....

[SeanB]

Backordered means they are selling too many, and want to spread the profit out over a period so the beancounters will be happier without a spike.

[Electro Fan]

Backordered means they are selling too many, and want to spread the profit out over a period so the beancounters will be happier without a spike.

So even though Dadler paid for his scope and took delivery of the scope they aren't going to count the sale because they didn't complete the delivery (with the license) and therefore they are going to delay booking the sale so they can smooth the spike?  Not to mention August and September are in the same quarter for most/all companies.  Kind of hard to imagine but if so it's an interesting way to make happy customers.  I have some faith in Keysight, I think there is a chance the license will become available sooner.

[Wuerstchenhund]

On a side note, Keysight is saying that the bandwidth upgrade license code that I ordered is "backordered" until September.

I have no idea how a license code can be backordered. 

As other said, it's mostly to spread the revenue.

That LeCroy does seem like a nice scope. What options does it come with? I only went for the Agilent due to the option bundle. Are they bandwidth upgradable (via software or mail-in retrofit)?

These are the options available for the WS3000:

http://teledynelecroy.com/oscilloscope/oscilloscopeseries.aspx?mseries=466

LeCroy currently does a promo in Europe where all software options (except MSO) are included, but my guess is that they would offer the same to US buyers as well.

Bandwidth is software upgradeable, however I doubt that this makes any sense, for this or any other scope. You're really much better off by buying the bandwidth you need in the foreseeable future now, and when you find you need more then sell the old scope and buy a new one with the better bandwidth.

[John Coloccia]

On a side note, Keysight is saying that the bandwidth upgrade license code that I ordered is "backordered" until September.

Did they charge you for it?  Just curious.

[dadler]

On a side note, Keysight is saying that the bandwidth upgrade license code that I ordered is "backordered" until September.

Did they charge you for it?  Just curious.

No, I have not yet been charged. Won't be charged until it "ships" =P

Just want the 200Mhz bandwidth. Only ordered the 100Mhz version of the scope because I was told the 200Mhz (pre-installed/labeled) version was backordered. Since it was the same price to get the DSOX3014T  + the upgrade code, I went that direction.

I ordered DSOXLAN + the upgrade code through Newark (received the DSOXLAN a couple days later), but I have telephoned Newark twice about the bandwidth code. They are being told by Keysight that license codes are "backordered" until September 4th. I ordered August 4th... hmmmm

I called again and got a nice lady in customer service at Newark and she said she'd do her best to contact Keysight via phone this time, and see what the deal is.

 

In all honesty, I bought the DSOX3000T because my DS2000 broke down and that was sufficient excuse (for me) to "upgrade" to the scope I wanted in the first place (given the free option deal). In retrospect, what a major headache. Ahh teaching me daily lessons in patience....

[pascal_sweden]

Regarding the touchscreen functionality in the Keysight: isn't it more like a gimmick for making your screen dirty with fingerprints?