| Products > Test Equipment |
| Siglent SDS1000X HD 12bit DSO's |
| << < (78/96) > >> |
| tszaboo:
--- Quote from: Martin72 on November 30, 2023, 09:35:19 pm ---I have never been interested in the internal generators because they are simply too limited. I bought an SDG1032X for my SDS2104Xplus back then and an SDG2042X (2122X, hehe) for my current 2504X HD. --- End quote --- Yeah, so the thing is, some of us has a limited budget for a home lab. |
| Martin72:
--- Quote ---I've never seen a EE say, they prefer not having a LA on a scope. Other disciplines, yes. --- End quote --- In the 80s/90s we (company i´m working for) used dozens of logic ICs in our circuits, so a logic analyzer made sense. Today it´s all integrated in a PLD or FPGA. |
| tv84:
Since the 1000X HD also has these designations inside: --- Code: ---SDS102X SDS102E SDS202E SDS104X SDS104E SDS204E SDS105X SDS105E SDS205E SDS106X SDS106E SDS206E SDS107X SDS107E SDS207E SDS110X SDS110E SDS210E SDS115X SDS115E SDS215E SDS120X SDS120E SDS220E SDS125X SDS125E SDS225E SDS130X SDS130E SDS135X SDS235E SDS150X SDS175X SDS1100X SDS1200X SDS1300X SDS1400X --- End code --- and the fact that the 800X HD FW might be very similar, maybe the conspiracy theory that the 800X HD wasn't supposed to be "800" has some credit... :-// |
| Martin72:
It would have been more "correct" to call the 800X HD 1000X HD, because the current 1000 series are small 7" scopes. But they couldn't use 2000X HD for the cheaper 10" 12 bit model because that already exists. So 1000X HD. And then they must have come up with the idea of making another 12-bit scope with a 7" display... |
| tszaboo:
--- Quote from: Martin72 on November 30, 2023, 09:51:20 pm --- --- Quote ---I've never seen a EE say, they prefer not having a LA on a scope. Other disciplines, yes. --- End quote --- In the 80s/90s we (company i´m working for) used dozens of logic ICs in our circuits, so a logic analyzer made sense. Today it´s all integrated in a PLD or FPGA. --- End quote --- Right, and most designs that I'm working on has ADCs/DACs on it, that need to be verified/debugged. Some of them has more than 10 inputs, and built in excitation current sources, and SPI interface, 100 page long datasheet. How do you verify that without a LA? Different people work on different projects, maybe we shouldn't be narrow minded that everyone has the same needs? And I give you a very good reason why a built in basic AWG is useful on a professional environment: It's one less instrument that need to be sent out for calibration. If I have a the need for a basic AWG, like the SDS1000, I would spend it's price on calibration basically every year. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |