Rigol equoipment; has anyone heard of a higher failure rate than other brands??

[saturation]

The comparisons vs Agilent depend on the device, both brands are top rated in their field.  For more comparisons just google search "Agilent versus X" and see the documents that pop up.

http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5991-0341EN.pdf

Where would Advantest & Anritsu fit in?

[saturation]

Again, its Agilent's perception of what the main competition for their similar product is.  That Rigol model was likely available when they wrote that document; its now discontinued and the new replacement is even more competitive against Agilent:

http://www.rigolna.com/products/digital-oscilloscopes/ds1000ca/

However, here is a recent forum post about an Agilent product glitch and the repair experience:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/agilent-2000x-has-lost-a-channel/msg489423/?topicseen#msg489423

That's what you'd like with warranty service from anyone.

What I found strange about that comparison is that in late 2013 Agilent would choose a Rigol scope from 2008/9 to compare against.   

[videobruce]

saturation;
I was referring to your 'list' as far as Advantest & Anritsu would be placed. I'm really not interested in what Agilent would give for a trade in allowance. 

[saturation]

They are top tier makers, as with Agilent, Tek, LeCroy etc.  but they have more focused products such as communications and semiconductor manufacturing.  I don't know them as well.  They are about 4-5000 employees [ about half of Agilent's T&M division] and have been around since before 1960, they are more on the level as Tek, LeCroy, Fluke, R&S. 

saturation;
I was referring to your 'list' as far as Advantest & Anritsu would be placed. I'm really not interested in what Agilent would give for a trade in allowance. 

[videobruce]

Really doesn't matter how good or popular a line is abroad, if there is little or no US based support, it's a moot point. 
Almost anyone can import a line into another country, but apparently it's up to the importer to support it and most seem not to. At least sufficiently.

I'm surprised GW Instek isn't more popular in the US given they appear to be in the same price range and business model (as far as pricing) as Rigol.

[Wuerstchenhund]

Yokogawa are another high end Japanese brand. They tend to be less popular outside Japan in the same way that Agilent and Tektronics are less popular over there - it's simply for historic reasons.

This is certainly not only for historic reasons. That Yokogawa scopes are less popular has more to do with the fact that Yokogawa only has two scope models (DM2000 and DM4000, both MSOs), of which one (DM4000) is a 8 ch scope which is only really useful for some niche cases. None of their scopes go beyond 500MHz or 2.5GS/s which puts them in the area of entry-level or lower midrange models from other manufacturers. And both scopes are generally pretty expensive, as are any of the few available options.

Yokogawa makes predominantly multi-channel logging kit with low sample rates, of which it sells quite a lot world-wide.

Scopes don't seem to be their core business.

[microe]

Long ago (in the early 2000s), I was contracted to create FPGA Development boards for my University. The existing FPGA boards on the market were just crammed full of crap, which made for an unintuitive excursion to find "free" pins for doing logic exercises in the lab.

Knowing that these would be abused by students, I had to come up with every possible route I could think of to damage these things. A few items of what I wound up determining:
1. No matter what, use linear regulators. In the worst case, the things get hot and their internal shutdown takes over. (Failsafe) - Switchers had a tendancy to overshoot their target regulation voltage and destroy the FPGA.
2. Anything that the students might touch, needed protection. All of the I/O had 330 ohm series resistors.
3. Someone will eventually burn out the primary path for an important signal, put down alternates and backups.

In the end, these boards were in service for six years, and only went into retirement because the software went obsolete/unsupported. Out of the 28 pc build, there were only two catastrophic/unsalvagable failures in that time- one of them was because a student couldn't locate the wall wart included with the unit, and just "hot wired" line voltage into the thing.

PhDs and Masters degrees mean diddily when it comes to the "practical." This same Uni, had a PhD student-in-progress who decided to take some measurements with a VNA and couldn't figure out what the APC-7 connectors were. In his brilliance, because hey "I'm a PhD student, therefore I'm smart!" he decided to solder an SMA connector onto these connectors. After he was reprimanded, all of the "expensive" gear was locked away into professors' labs and only accessible through obtaining permission and getting grilled on whether you know wtf you're doing or not.

Is then comes as no surprise that the very bottom-barrel test gear by Rigol (or anyone else, really) disintegrates in the School setting. Many of these students approach an instrument like it were spaghetti being thrown to the wall to find out what sticks.

Maybe you should let me be your Masters student. I ensure not to broke your oscilloscope.

[schopi68]

As Rigol seems to focus more and more into the professional markets (i think they are still placed in the hobbyist/semiprofessional markets), i would expect they're rising their product quality. So i think we should always keep the date of the product development in mind.

It could be a little bit like japanese cars in the 80s: It was well known that they were always broken and already rusty on delivery - but they worked on it and in the meanwhile they are better than some of the elder competitors.

Maybe it's the same with Rigol.
(But i am  not sure if this is really the case. I Just bought an DG1062z AWF. Out of the package it delivered a clipped signal with a much to high amplitude on one channel at the moment i switched it to 50 Ohms. 
So replaced. The replacement unit was far out of spec in its frequency accuracy (>10ppm instead of 1 ppm). Adjustment was impossible, so it had to be replaced too. 
Yesterday the new unit arrived, this time everything seems to be in spec. But i'll wait until i have done some burn in until i open my crossed fingers.

Two out of three devices with defect on arrival. One of the defects wouldn't be recognized by about 90% of the typical users.

[coppice]

As Rigol seems to focus more and more into the professional markets (i think they are still placed in the hobbyist/semiprofessional markets), i would expect they're rising their product quality. So i think we should always keep the date of the product development in mind.

It could be a little bit like japanese cars in the 80s: It was well known that they were always broken and already rusty on delivery - but they worked on it and in the meanwhile they are better than some of the elder competitors.

Maybe it's the same with Rigol.
(But i am  not sure if this is really the case. I Just bought an DG1062z AWF. Out of the package it delivered a clipped signal with a much to high amplitude on one channel at the moment i switched it to 50 Ohms. 
So replaced. The replacement unit was far out of spec in its frequency accuracy (>10ppm instead of 1 ppm). Adjustment was impossible, so it had to be replaced too. 
Yesterday the new unit arrived, this time everything seems to be in spec. But i'll wait until i have done some burn in until i open my crossed fingers.

Two out of three devices with defect on arrival. One of the defects wouldn't be recognized by about 90% of the typical users.

Far too much test equipment has problems on delivery, whichever make it is. A lot of it isn't too reliable either. That hasn't stopped people like Tektronix being considered very much professional equipment makers. The amazing thing is the long service life much of this stuff has, despite its problems.

I think being considered professional in test equipment has more to do with having big defence customers. :-) [for youngster viewers: try looking up the fate of high end test equipment makers during big downturns in defence spending, and you might see what I mean by that]