Products > Test Equipment
Siglent SDS2000X Plus - Bugs / Missing Features / Feature Requests
2N3055:
--- Quote from: ebastler on November 21, 2023, 08:16:36 am ---Thank you for the perspective, Performa01. To be clear, I certainly don't expect Siglent to grant every wish and implement every feature request; that would obviously be unreasonable.
More clarity would help to manage expectations -- e.g. your statement that four math channels just can't happen due to limited computational resources. I had suspected that, but had not yet seen a clear statement anywhere. More transparency regarding timelines would also be helpful in my opinion. I would strongly encourage Siglent to switch to a time-boxed development and release cycle for updates once an instrument is in "sustaining" mode: Set a release cadence upfront, say one feature release per year, then implement features incrementally until the drop-dead date for the test and release phase.
May I also say that the Siglent advocates here on the forum have set expectations pretty high. Siglent is touted as "the company which keeps developing their products and adding features throughout the product life cycle", and also as "the company which does not implement 'checkbox features' just to have them in the spec sheet, but does things properly". Seeing that the last major feature release for the SDS2000X+ happened two years ago, and apparently the next one will not happen soon, conflicts with those expectations. And seeing the very basic AWG in the same scope, and its lack of integration with the scope functionality, is not in line with the second claim.
I have nevertheless ordered the 2000X+, based on its current specs. It still seems to be the best match for my needs within the budget I have set for myself. But it was a painful decision due to some of the unexpected limitations, and I was hoping that the firmware update plans would make it a bit easier.
--- End quote ---
If you don't mind, I would like to throw in my 2c into discussion.
Statements on how Siglent keeps developing products are more than true. Track record speaks for them.
In my experience expectations by customers are almost always "too optimistic". From my own experience, with my own products. Nothing wrong with that, but customer expectations are not same as the promise by the manufacturer. Manufacturer might give their best to keep the platform live and vibrant or they can release it, fix glaring mistakes and forget about it. It is up to reader to do their homework which is which.
As to expectations, fact that Siglent is still keeping this scope in active development and keeps adding features long after release should not be confused with "Siglent promises to keep adding major features that will with time convert a 1000€ scope into same capability as 20000€ LeCroy".
Realistically, manufacturer will add features to keep scope competent contender in a marketplace where it belongs. They might add a bit more to keep it fresh and to keep certain strategic advantage. But mostly never it will grow so much to exit it's class and enter one above. For both strategic and technical reasons.
Unfortunately, I don't keep an archive of old datasheets and manuals so we can compare. Shame.
As for development and release schedules, that is also interesting and not so simple topic.
First, these touchscopes from Siglent are part of platform based on common code base.
While they don't share common FW in binary form, they share common framework.
Adding new features logically happens on platform level and then gets propagated to it's members, based on product placement, architecture and technical details.
There will be some implementation details specific to certain model. If that specific detail would require a separate, model specific, piece of code to accomplish something differently than the rest, than that is not optimal. In which case chance of that happening is not so high, unless it is something of vital importance. Sometimes, a feature is developed for higher models and propagated to all because it is nice to have and no problem to implement. Like mounting disk shares etc...
Development and release cycles are all impacted by this. This makes them highly nonlinear and interdependent.
In addition to that, modern practice to develop software on fixed released schedules without and regard to quality or completeness of code has shown catastrophic results for quality of code.
Just look at Rigol which released 4 different new scopes (4 products) based solely on management decision to stick to aggressive timetables. It's been half a year now... They basically released hardware-software prototypes, what Microsoft would call RC (release candidates). It is almost completely defined hardware and software developed to the point of software architecture largely defined and basic modules implemented in their first iteration.
This is what you get if you have to release software twice a year instead of when it's done..
Since Siglent is very mindful of their professional market (while Rigol seems to focus mostly on hobby market, strategically) they make sure their releases pass the litmus test before releasing. Of course nothing is completely perfect all the time, but they put in serious effort to do so. As opposed to blatant disregard to these principles like some other do.
I ask you to take Keysight and R&S as example an take a look how aggressive are they with releases and how often they do them.
And how many real features they added during lifecycle. Whatever they did add was to simply fix initial bad decision to artificially limit products in a first place. R&S added slightly better math on RTB2000 only after sever backlash by users that complained that 3000-4000 € scope had worse math than 500€ Chinese scopes. You still have to buy segmented memory and basic decodes for RTB2000 as a separate option.. Or Keysight with 1000X where they finally opened up DSOX1204 to have simply basic functions other much less expensive scope had for years. Basic measurement statistics was only added in september of 2021. and that was last release of FW for it. Since release there were only 4 FW updates (since October 2018).
None of the "big boys" will ever commit to any schedules or feature.
FW updates are in a way a strategic resource, nobody wants to open their cards..
I thing Siglent is actually doing a better job in this regard.
mawyatt:
--- Quote from: ebastler on November 21, 2023, 08:16:36 am ---
I have nevertheless ordered the 2000X+, based on its current specs. It still seems to be the best match for my needs within the budget I have set for myself.
--- End quote ---
Good choice!!
You'll like the 2000X+, quite a value, and slated more for professional types with higher end features that are actually useful and work rather than being cute!!
For example, just yesterday we modified our flawed Micsig DP10007 Differential Probe (thanks ExaLab!!). This is a simple hardware "fix" to improve CMRR (way out of spec), and requires recalibration. When attempting such the signal of interest is buried in noise, and difficult to null. However employing the SD2000X+ nice FFT (it's somewhat slow tho) makes this nulling exercise a little easier to accomplish.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-eevblog-hv-probe/150/
Also, contrary to many opinions, we've found the Bode Function (FRA) quite useful, and even developed a set of "Injection Transformers" to support Open Loop measurements within Closed Loop Systems!!
Best,
ebastler:
Well, Siglent certainly has loyal customers/beta-testers/consultants here -- so they must be doing something right! :-+
Thanks for you long post, 2N3055. You make several valid points. I'll comment on just a few aspects where I don't concur:
--- Quote from: 2N3055 on November 21, 2023, 01:25:04 pm ---As to expectations, fact that Siglent is still keeping this scope in active development and keeps adding features long after release should not be confused with "Siglent promises to keep adding major features that will with time convert a 1000€ scope into same capability as 20000€ LeCroy".
Realistically, manufacturer will add features to keep scope competent contender in a marketplace where it belongs. They might add a bit more to keep it fresh and to keep certain strategic advantage. But mostly never it will grow so much to exit it's class and enter one above. For both strategic and technical reasons.
--- End quote ---
Can we please keep this discussion fair and level. I don't think I suggested anything unreasonable which would catapult the scope out of its class:
* The ability to "trim" a captured waveform and send it to the AWG -- such that a full period is played back, rather than some arbitrary chunk which happens to fit the screen width -- is standard on pretty much every DSO with a built-in AWG, to my knowledge.
* Filters (as a Math operation) are also standard in this class, e.g. on the RTB2000, DSOX1200, MSO5000. The SDS2000X+ is the odd one out here, since it apparently still does not have them. And while I get it that going beyond 2 math channels would stretch the computational resources too much, I can't see why simple FIR or IIR filters should require more computing power than other math operations.
* Being able to configure a WiFi dongle is not standard yet. But since Siglent have this feature in the lower-end scopes, and actually have the RTL8188 driver up and running on the X+, it seems like low-hanging fruit and a nice differentiator.So please don't give a distorted view of user expecations here.
--- Quote ---As for development and release schedules, that is also interesting and not so simple topic.
[...]
In addition to that, modern practice to develop software on fixed released schedules without and regard to quality or completeness of code has shown catastrophic results for quality of code.
Just look at Rigol which released 4 different new scopes (4 products) based solely on management decision to stick to aggressive timetables. [...]
This is what you get if you have to release software twice a year instead of when it's done..
--- End quote ---
Sure, I know about dependencies, platform approach etc.; I have been working in industrial instrument R&D for a long time. I specifically suggested that Siglent switch to a time-boxed approach once the product is in "sustaining" mode, with incremental feature additions and bug fixes -- not for new development. No need for shadow-boxing, please.
--- Quote ---None of the "big boys" will ever commit to any schedules or feature.
FW updates are in a way a strategic resource, nobody wants to open their cards..
I thing Siglent is actually doing a better job in this regard.
--- End quote ---
Again, commiting to features upfront is not what I suggested. The idea is to commit to a timeline cadence for updates -- so customers see that you are still committed to the product, and don't keep scratching at your door to ask when the next update will come. Keep the scope of the release open, to manage technical risk and keep some flexibility in the resources you can assign to firmware improvements.
Maybe this is not standard in the industry. I am not saying that Siglent is doing worse than other brands. But I think this would be a realistic approach how they could do better than the competition.
KungFuJosh:
--- Quote from: ebastler on November 21, 2023, 03:33:50 pm ---Being able to configure a WiFi dongle is not standard yet. But since Siglent have this feature in the lower-end scopes, and actually have the RTL8188 driver up and running on the X+, it seems like low-hanging fruit and a nice differentiator.
The idea is to commit to a timeline cadence for updates -- so customers see that you are still committed to the product, and don't keep scratching at your door to ask when the next update will come.
--- End quote ---
You don't need a wifi dongle if it's that important to you. You can connect a TL-WR902AC or TL-WR802N or similar to connect your scope via wifi. The wifi dongle idea limits your ability for range and speed.
I completely disagree with you on setting dates for the firmware releases. There's absolutely no point beyond consumers having something to look forward to. The way they do it now is perfect. Work on shit, test it, test it more, then release it. The flipside of your idea is that a bug fix could be ready, but the release date is 4 months away. What's the point of that? If stuff is ready, release it! If not, don't!
mawyatt:
--- Quote from: ebastler on November 21, 2023, 03:33:50 pm ---Well, Siglent certainly has loyal customers/beta-testers/consultants here -- so they must be doing something right! :-+
--- End quote ---
In our case Siglent had to "Earn" our loyalty !!
Our career spanned over 6 decades (still going), mostly in R&D, and we've used just every piece of TE one can imagine. When we retired from regular duty and formed our own company, our 1st major purchase was a DSO/MSO.
We loitered here for awhile gathering information and understanding sources of such, we decided to get the Siglent SDS2000X+ a few years ago, best equipment purchase decision we've made, so we got another!! So next was a SA, SSA3021X+ another good decision, then AWG the SDG2042X and SDG6022X pretty darn good AWGs, then the PS the SDP3303X, also pretty good and we got 2 more, then SDM3065X, not a DMM we particularly are fond of (not bad tho, but for our precision use it's up against some stiff competition) and why we have 3 KS34465As, DM6500, HP34401A and AG34401A. When we needed an Electronic Load and got the SDL1020X-E which has been put through it's paces wrt dealing with lots of power up to 30amps emulating various high power loads and it hasn't smoked yet!! Believe me we didn't expect it to survive what we've thrown at it, but it has, a tribute to the design and margin involved :-+
With all this Siglent equipment we haven't seen a hiccup yet (well we did screw up a PS by not following the Cal procedure properly, Siglent NA fixed it at no charge!!), even just today we "thought" our SDG6022X had developed a problem (see attachment). Figured the AWG somehow got hosed it up and causing the squarewave with issue shown. Checked everything over and over, even started a post and when back before posting and tried to "think" what could cause this, and rechecked everything again, nope nothing found. Then we reminded ourselves KTI (Know Thy Instrument), and went back a 3rd time and sure enough we had the output waveform combine turn "ON", dumb arse |O
We have other equipment from Konrad, Tonghui, Hioki, GW Instek, Rigol, Pico, Tektronix, LeCroy, Micsig, Analog Discovery and so on, and tend to do our homework before acquisition and don't like to return things unless they are defective, or totally misleading.
We have a pro-equipment mentality, and a pro-support mentality, meaning we don't want to take advantage of suppliers and such as they are the life blood of our chosen field, and without such we would be back in the electronics "dark ages", but also don't hold back when somethings not right, and/or equipment is misleading in performance expectations (many stories behind this).
Anyway, as always YMMV and we've certainly got good mileage from our Siglent gear!!
Best,
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version