Keysight EDUX1002G Spec Issue

[Alex Nikitin]

 

What exactly anything after #44 has to do with

Keysight Community Discussion Forums - "Discontinued"

?

 Cheers

Alex

[Kean]

Yeah, this has been a waste of time.

Maybe a moderator can split this out into a separate topic.

[WS]

What exactly anything after #44 has to do with
Alex

It's magic! 

[Alex Nikitin]

What exactly anything after #44 has to do with
Alex

It's magic! 

it is not magic

This is rude, and bad internet etiquette (c)

Cheers

Alex

[WS]

I didn't want to create my own thread so as not to inflame the issue. I wanted to hear the opinion of the community and, most importantly, the opinion of Keysight representative. That would have been enough. But I didn't expect that the local public can't even read a few lines in the documents and understand what they read. I am discouraged. I apologize for posting in this thread. However, the moderator could have warned about it right away.

[Kean]

However, the moderator could have warned about it right away.

And yet... Dave, the owner of EEVblog, warned you in reply #47.

Now please go and be discouraged somewhere else.

[EEVblog]

Maybe a moderator can split this out into a separate topic.

Done.

[WS]

A little more about documentation so that there are no questions. The technical documentation, in which the technical characteristics of the device are stated, is the main document. The device must strictly comply with it. You won't claim that Keysight has another important document in which they don't guarantee the compliance of the declared characteristics with the real ones Usually, the actual performance exceeds the stated performance.
 How to read the documents on the 1002G. Initially there were two documents, a main document and an additional one with a list of firmware changes. If in the basic document the minimum FRA frequency is 20Hz, and in the second document for the new firmware is 10Hz, the information from the first document loses relevance. As a result, there is a third document with release dates between the first and the second. So this document should be removed from consideration, it is not relevant. As a result, in the latest firmware version 1.20 the FRA frequency is limited by the capabilities of the built-in generator. So you need to look in the base document in the generator characteristics section, where 0.1Hz-20MHz is specified. This is what was required to prove.

[WS]

 I thought I would post a summary of how and by what methods Keysight technical support was handled. I am trying to keep it short, just the gist.
 Let me remind you that the reason for contacting technical support is the failure to match the declared characteristics of FRA analysis with the real ones.

1.   Me - why can't the lower boundary frequency of the FRA be set below 10Hz, since the specifications limit it to the capabilities of the built-in oscillator (0.1Hz)?
Keysight - you don't understand correctly what is written in the document.
Me - no, I understand everything correctly!

2.   Keysight - you are looking at the wrong document, you need to look at the base document, it specifies a lower frequency of 20Hz.
Me - This document refers to the very first version of the firmware. Already in the second version the frequency became 10Hz. You are mistaken and have a poor understanding of your own documents.

3.   Keysight - The technical specifications of your instrument do not allow you to make the frequency lower than 10Hz.
I - it is not. And the real frequency that is really needed is 1Hz, you don't need less.
 
 I will attach two pictures showing two 1Hz oscillograms from the internal generator. You can clearly see the amplitude of the signals and cursor measurements can be made. There is no barrier to automating this process.
 You can draw your own conclusions about the competence of Keysight technical support.
 And in the beginning, Keysight didn't want to provide technical support because I don't have a contract. But they did, and thank you for that. But thanks for the fact itself

[shabaz]

Very glad Keysight didn't waste any further time on that 5-year-old document, and concentrated on other customers that needed help!

Your behaviour was tantamount to blackmail when you asked the guy for compensation in exchange for your silence regarding the document update:

It's beautiful! And I will then proceed to post all of this information publicly. These are the kind
of heroes people need to know! You do realize that you did a very bad thing and your act of
changing the documents is the most idiotic thing that could be done. It's a significant damage to
Keysight's reputation. I would fire you without question. Or will you still be able to offer me
some compensation and settle the matter amicably?

You need some personal time to reflect on it and maybe sincerely apologize to the guy.

[WS]

Very glad Keysight didn't waste any further time on that 5-year-old document, and concentrated on other customers that needed help!

Your behaviour was tantamount to blackmail when you asked the guy for compensation in exchange for your silence regarding the document update:

You need some personal time to reflect on it and maybe sincerely apologize to the guy.

I'm sorry that the people to whom I've provided thorough information still can't get the point across.  And as for blackmail. Certainly it can be taken as blackmail, but after what happened? It happened exactly after I'd been deceived several times. Can you count how many times that's happened? Is this normal behavior for a famous firm? Who should apologize to whom? Who should be fired from customer support?
 And do you yourself understand the meaning of the term "blackmail"? My point is, after everything that's happened, Keysight owes me anyway. Technical support did not start a dialog with me by saying: sorry, we have a mistake in our documents, we don't know how it could happen! But they started impudent fooling around in the hope that I would leave them alone. Where did they get this model of behavior? Do they practice it?

[Kean]

I'm sorry that those of us who have replied have also not got the point across.

The firmware release notes were poorly worded.  I think we all agree with that.
The specifications for FRA frequency range in the product datasheet did not change.  Ditto [1].
You expected something based the release notes that was not intended, and got rather rude when told that was not supported.  I think most of us also agree with that.
The firmware release notes were updated, but with poor revision control.  Again, ditto.

You are complaining about the lack of support for something written in firmware release notes over five years old on a low-end (and now discontinued) product.
You don't have a support contract with Keysight, nor would it still be under any warranty (standard 3 year warranty, that unit was shipped in late 2017).
The company has moved on to support of their newer products.

You seem to have trouble accepting any of this...
I am not sure why I am still wasting my precious time replying.  Probably ADHD related.

[1] Yes, an earlier firmware update may have extended the lower end of FRA frequency range, and that isn't updated in the datasheet either.  I'd guess that isn't a guaranteed specification, just a bonus.

[WS]

I'm sorry that those of us who have replied have also not got the point across.

[1] Yes, an earlier firmware update may have extended the lower end of FRA frequency range, and that isn't updated in the datasheet either.  I'd guess that isn't a guaranteed specification, just a bonus.

Dear, do you find it difficult to understand the meaning of the summary? Read again or several times my posts #57 #58. Maybe you'll finally get the point of what's going on.
 
p.s. My abruptness in communication is aimed at getting my interlocutor to start using his head for its intended purpose and stop writing me nonsense.

[Kean]

I have no problem with understanding, and have spent far too much time reading over what you wrote.

I agree that they did not make that very clear in the release notes, and I may have assumed much the same as you had I read it separately from this discussion and cared enough to look into it.  When you asked about it many years later, I think they explained it pretty clearly after doing some internal research.  The lower end of frequency for FRA was not changed to 0.1Hz in the firmware update, just the selectable resolution changed from 10Hz to 1Hz steps.

Maybe they had originally hoped to cover the whole frequency, but it turned out impractical.  Or maybe there was some miscommunication between engineering and the tech writers.  Those are just possible explanations for the wording.  The support person presumably did not write the original release note, and could only go on what they were informed by engineering in their replies to you.  No one else apparently ever opened a similar support case.  They also gave what I think is a reasonable explanation of why they could not extend the feature below 10Hz.

As others pointed out, your limit of recourse would likely be a refund of purchase price, but that might vary depending on laws where you live.  The elapsed time likely being a limiting factor.  If taken to court, I suspect it would be thrown out as the device still meets (or improved on) the datasheet specifications.

Had you not been so rude, and had you explained clearly why it was so important to you as a student/hobbyist/whatever, then they might have offered you a better deal than a refund.  Probably not but it happens occasionally, as large corporations often have a budget for that.

I will not write any more in reply - nonsense or otherwise as you see it.

[WS]

I have no problem with understanding, and have spent far too much time reading over what you wrote.

And yet you have a comprehension problem. You don't see the problem at all.
And tech support could have just apologized for the error in their first message and that's it.  But no, they made a fool of me.