[sdiy] What test gear do you use?

[rsdio at audiobanshee.com]

If you’ll note, I used terms like “unusable” and “useless” before saying “overall design quality.” I guess I should have said, “overall usability design quality” or “overall user experience design quality.”

I am an EE and I have used many different ‘scopes over the decades. When I’m using a ‘scope, I’m not really concerned with what it looks like when you take it apart (*) in a YouTube video, I’m focused on getting a task done. The Rigol makes it almost impossible to get work done at a reasonable pace. I’d rather have an ancient ‘scope with fewer features that work quickly, than a modern ‘scope that doesn’t know how to provide precise control over those features. I’m not saying that the encoders are falling off (physical build quality), I’m saying that I can’t use them to get work done efficiently (user experience design quality).

It’s like the firmware inside the Rigol was created by a team with absolutely no experience in practical functionality or user experience.

Mere editing of things like calibration scaling or DC offset gets to be hopeless. If all you know how to do when it comes to using a ‘scope is the automatic settings, then the encoders won’t really bother you.

Admittedly, some of my clients are not EE graduates, and they’re not interested in hiring EE graduates, but they still buy a ‘scope so they can plod along. Folks who don’t know what they’re missing aren’t really going to complain about the poor usability of the Rigol designs. I guarantee you that it’s only popular because it’s cheap and most folks don’t know any better.

Brian

p.s. I am happy that the Tektronix parts have reliable build quality. If the user experience wasn’t functional, then I really wouldn’t care how well the Tektronix was put together. However, when they have both build quality and appropriate user interface design, that’s the ultimate.


On May 6, 2018, at 3:35 PM, sleepy_dog at gmx.de wrote:
> >> I have found the Rigol products to be completely unusable compared to quality ‘scopes. The encoders are useless, for all intents and purposes. There’s a reason these ‘scopes are cheap, and hacking one to a higher base model does not make up for the poor overall design quality.
> <<
> 
> Do you have anything concrete about that "poor overall design quality"?
> I have seen teardowns and extensive tests done by several EEs, and they were quite impressed with the quality, even though there have initially been some firmware bugs.
> 
> Apparently many people finding them quite usable, some of them smaller companies, not just hobbyists.
> When I bought my Rigol of the newer generation when it had just come out, its specs - and they are real specs - completely dwarfed the back then basic Tek DSO model, especially its laughable point memory size (and the "1 elephant tooth per kpoints" they were asking for extra). For what was it, 1/3 the price or less? I don't remember exactly.
> 
> Now take it with as many tablespoons of salt as you like as I'm no EE, but there are not just a few EEs who do approve of that product line :-)
> 
> I'm not sure what exactly is your beef with the encoders. That they're a bit slow?